From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 2 16:10:38 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 23:10:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education Message-ID: https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education By David Stein A long piece focusing on proposed approach to education. The entire piece is interesting reading but this statement alone is worth our consideration IMHO. "Modern Orthodoxy is a worldview that encompasses intellectual, social, spiritual, cultural, and professional dimensions, and which recognizes that there exist multiple - and competing - values in our world, all while upholding the primacy of Torah learning and observance. All too often, however, it gets reduced (at worst) to an ideology of compromise, or (at best) a superficial pairing of general and Judaic studies." 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 Tue Jul 2 15:37:33 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:37:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments Message-ID: R Zev Sero wrote ?He has to deposit it first and then withdraw the cash. Unless he happens to know a store that takes third-party checks.? The Israeli poskim who said that checks were like cash were assuming that 3rd party checks were accepted at stores as it used to be in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 4 11:01:16 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: <20190704180116.GA21934@aishdas.org> All this talk of Shabbos as a day to disconnect from phone, whatsapp and facetime, from social media, from the internet, from television and its replacements made me think... I mean, if we were talking about feeling flooded by work email in particular, that would be one thing. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of this kind of marketing Shabbos. Historically, we noted that "melakhah" refers to creative activity in particular. And thus Shabbos was an imitation of Hashem's taking a break from creating so that we could have a day on which to just be -- vayinafash. Now, we are viewing Shabbos as a break from filling our time basically doing nothing... I see this more as an observation about those 6 days. There was a time when our lives revolved around sowing and plowing, shearing and weaving, trapping and tanning, building and repairing. Now we spend our days typing and communicating. But not in a socially binding way, but in a manner that stresses us out to the point where we can be excited by the idea of a day off from it. They did, we critique. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience; http://www.aishdas.org/asp Experience comes from bad decisions. Author: Widen Your Tent - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 8 06:39:06 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:39:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? Message-ID: Please see https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5285 This is a rather long article that deals with this subject. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Jul 8 06:07:02 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: "They did, we critique." Words aren't creative? How interesting. But don't tell it only to us. Tell it to the tana'im, amora'im, rishonim, acharonim etc etc. You may say that everything they wrote/said was truly creative and lots of what we do is not. Ok. But there's still plenty of creativity in a world where we think and write rather than sow and plow. The interesting question is why that type of creativity is not included in the forbidden work of shabbat, especially since God's creativity during the six days of creation came about through words and not the type of creativity in the 39 melachot. J Sent from my iPhone From theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com Tue Jul 9 08:20:03 2019 From: theseventhbeggar at hotmail.com (The Seventh Beggar) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:20:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Necromancy and Jesus in Gittin 56b-57a Message-ID: ?In Gittin 56b-57b, it has the account of Onkelos using necromancy to talk to Jesus. I am trying to find both more information about this account in other texts, if any, and also other instances where individuals talked to Jesus with him being in Gehinom. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 10 04:17:55 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:17:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? 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 Wed Jul 10 04:19:15 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] psak Message-ID: When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the practical halachic process going forward any different from one where it closes with teiku? If so, how? 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 simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 10 23:40:27 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:40:27 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 00:09 Rich, Joel wrote: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not parallel to > those for not saying lamenatzeach? The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 19:46:46 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:46:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tachanun Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Why are the rules for which days we don't say tachanun not > parallel to those for not saying lamenatzeach? R' Simon Montagu answered: > The Levush (132:1) says because it's part of the Kedusha. Note > that the question only arises in minhag Ashkenaz -- for Sephardim > the rules _are_ the same for tahanun and lamenatzeah Being "part of the Kedusha" doesn't really explain anything, at least not to me, because (a) in what way is it part of the Kedusha, and (b) why would that make a difference? Here's what I saw in Levush 132:1, about halfway through that long paragraph. Note that what he calls "Seder Kedusha" corresponds to what most of us call "Uva L'tzion". Also note that in this section that I've chosen to translate, he introduces the paragraph of Lamenatzeach not by that name, but by its initial words, presumably to underscore its role for a Day Of Tzara. <<< They also established to begin Seder Kedusha with "Mizmor Yaancha Hashem B'yom Tzara - A psalm that Hashem will answer you on a day of trouble", because it was established through trouble and at a time of trouble, as will be explained soon, b'ezras Hashem. And it seems to me that for this reason too, we say Lamenatzeach even on days when we don't say Tachanun, because it belongs to Seder Kedusha, except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanuka, Purim, Erev Pesach, and Erev Yom Kippur, because all these days are more holidayish than other days, as will be explained, each in its place, b'ezras Hashem. And even though we do say the Seder Kedusha on them, nevertheless, we don't say Lamenatzeach on them, to show their holiness and that they are *not* a day of tzara like other days. >>> What the Levush does not explain, is why Tachanun and Lamenatzeach have different rules (according to Ashkenazim, thank you RSM). The Levush is pretty clear that Lamenatzeach is to be said only on a day of (relative) tzara, and to be avoided on a day of (relative) Yom Tov. What he does NOT explain (at least not in this section) is the rule for Tachanun, Is "tzara" the yardstick for Tachanun, or does Tachanun use a different yardstick? To be more explicit: It seems that Pesach Sheni and Lag Baomer are sufficiently ordinary that there is no problem with calling them a Yom Tzara in the context of Lamenatzeach. But they are special to a degree that conflicts with Tachanun. What makes Tachanun different? [Translation note: The Levush uses the phrase "yomim tovim", but I found it difficult to read that as a plural of "yom Tov". I read it with a pause between those two words, so that "yomim" means days, and "tovim" is an *adjective* meaning good in a holiday sense.] Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jul 13 20:41:58 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:41:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 Message-ID: . Anyone with access to a popular account of the flight of Apollo 11, AND a calendar for the years 5729/1969, can easily confirm the following timeline: Weds July 16 - Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av - Apollo 11 launched Sun July 20 - first day of Shavua Shechal Bo - Moon landing Thurs July 24 - Tisha B'av - Splashdown Shortly after the splashdown, President Nixon congratulated the astronauts, and said (among many other things) that "this is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation." I have a suspicion that the contemporary gedolim might have disagreed. I remember living through all that excitement, but my excitement was unfettered by any appreciation for the significance of Tisha B'Av and the Nine Days. My awareness of such things was still a few years in my future. I am writing today to ask: What thoughts and feelings were going through the Jewish world at the time. I suppose that a certain amount of excitement was unavoidable, but was there any feeling that the schedule and timing should be taken as some sort of ominous message? I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? advTHANKSance, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 04:58:05 2019 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:58:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? Message-ID: What language did Bilaam speak? Since he was from Aram supposedly he spoke Aramaic (live Lavan) 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? 2. What language was the blessings originally given in? 3. What language did the donkey speak to him? 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak Aramaic. -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 09:51:11 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:51:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect Message-ID: . R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. He seems to ignore the creativity of manipulating electrons to put words on a screen, and have those words appear on another screen a world away. I'm totally okay with that, because the thrust of the thread is not about "does this violate halacha", but rather, "is this the sort of resting that Shabbos is supposed to provide?" My answer is that RMB is looking only at the D'Oraisas. Let's think about the neviim who warned us about Mimtzo Cheftzecha and Daber Davar. A major factor of what they considered "unshabbosdik" was business activities -- which are "merely" a gezera against the creative activity of writing receipts and such. "Im tashiv mishabas raglecha..." If if it is anti-Shabbos to simply enter one's farm to simply check on how the crops are doing, then isn't checking one's email even more so? OTOH, if anyone wants to ask, "What is unshabbosdik about non-creative things like doing business or even merely talking about business?", that would be interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Sun Jul 14 10:57:59 2019 From: mgluck at gmail.com (mgluck at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d53a6d$ac948b00$05bda100$@gmail.com> R? Akiva Miller: I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish Observer? -------------------- This doesn?t directly answer your question, but it is of interest. The Jewish Observer?s take on the Apollo 11 moon landing: http://agudathisrael.org/the-jewish-observer-vol-6-no-2-september-1969elul-5729/ KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:47:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Apollo 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174701.GC25282@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:41:58PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I imagine that some listmembers could argue that this question is a mere : discussion of history, and belongs on Areivim. If that's the decision of : the moderator I won't complain. But I really am wondering if there's a : mussar here for us. If Apollo 11 lasted exactly the length of the Nine : Days, was that really a coincidence? Or is there a message? What would have : appeared in Mishpacha or the Yated? What *did* appear in the Jewish : Observer? That depends in part on your metaphysics. Someone with strong rationalist inclinations may not believe in omnisiginificance, and coincidences do happen. Someone a little less rationalist who does believe that nothing is ever by chance or arbitrary might believe there must be a lesson. Someone more mystically inclined might instead say their is a metaphysical cauaal connection, something aout the energy of the 9 days that made the moon landing possible. And not necessarily a lesson for us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them, http://www.aishdas.org/asp I have found myself, my work, and my God. Author: Widen Your Tent - Helen Keller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Sun Jul 14 12:49:31 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:49:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Manuscripts Message-ID: I have no expertise but found this post of interest: http://kotzkblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/234-italian-geniza.html If accurate, what is the impact of new data points (oops text) 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 Sun Jul 14 12:33:52 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:33:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Modern Orthodox Jewish Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714193352.GD6677@aishdas.org> There is a reply to RJM after the lengthy quote from my blog. If you aren't interested in following that, you might want to skip down to the horizontal line and check that. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:37:46PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : https://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary/compartmentalization-and-synthesis-in-modern-orthodox-jewish-education/#em : : Compartmentalization and Synthesis in Modern Orthodox Jewish Education : By David Stein I have repeatedly noted (including here once or twice) a danger that founding a community on RYBS's philosophy would have to avoid, and my belief that American MO failed to avoid the trap. See I raised other issues that are less relevant to this thread. Here's What are those peaks? The essay includes a description of his vision for Yeshiva University. Many complain about some of the material taught at YU; classes that include Greek mythology, or teachers that espouse heresy. However, Rabbi Soloveitchik (according to a lengthy quote in vol. II of R' Rakeffet's book) lauded YU's independence, running a full yeshiva and a full university totally unconnected from each other but under the same roof. In contrast, in Lander College the rashei yeshiva have veto power over what is taught in the university. The YU experience allows a student to deal with the confrontation of the two unadulterated worlds in a safe context, rather than provide a fused experience that will provide less preparation for living according to the Torah in the "real" world. Synthesis, RYBS argues, would produce a yeshiva that couldn't simply run in the footsteps of Volozhin and a university that couldn't aspire to be a Harvard. Once blended, neither is left alone. ... Again, I think the answer is "no". Maybe the typical person who wades though this blog has an interest in heavy thought where words like dialectic or antinomy are thrown around, where I speak of the Maharal's model of halakhah sounding fundamentally Platonic, or I use examples from Quantum Mechanics or Information science to illustrate a point. But this isn't the Orthodox world's most popular blog. Most people see academia as "ivory tower". Rather than giving someone a more precise and informed perspective of reality, they perceive the academic as disconnected from the real world and their experience. Thus, while to RYBS, the encounter was between Rashi and Rachmaninoff, between the Rambam and Reimann geometry (where the Red Sox and Westerns are side-matters to the core conflict), to the community who aspires to follow his vision, the reality tends to be an English halachic handbook and the Yankees. u-: The conjunctive linking Torah and Mada -- can we teach the masses to aspire for navigating the tension of conflicting values? The twin peaks calling RYBS are creative lomdus and secular knowledge. The confrontation between Torah and the world in which we live creates a tension which fuels creativity. Man is called to cognitively resolve the sanctification of this world, which can only be acheived through halakhah. This vision of unity of Torah and Madda demands that the individual himself pair in that creative with G-d, that finding their own resolution of the diealectiv tension. Cognitive man harnesed to applying the goals of homo religiosus to master this world in sanctity -- vekivshuha. The majority of his followers are trying to juggle a rule set and the western world -- not just high culture and academic knowledge, but primarily the day-to-day mileau they are exposed to and the values assumed by the world around them. And in any case, they can't employ creativity to map halakhah to the world they face. The majority of any large community will not be people capable of it -- they aren't posqim and rabbanim. When people are called upon to live in two worlds, and yet are unequipped to deal with the resulting conflicts, they are left in cognitive dissonance, which leaves them with two recourses. Both of which we find in practice, among those who aspire to live by RYBS's teachings (as well as among many others). The first approach is to keep them separate. Since he doesn't have the tools to navigate the gap between the worlds, the person compartmentalizes them. Dr. David Singer gives an example in Tradition 21(4), in his article "[44]Is Club Med Kosher? Reflections on Synthesis and Compartmentalization" (available by subscription only). It all started when I told my friend Larry Grossman that I was planning to take my wife Judy to Club Med for a winter vacation. On December 22, 1983, you see, Judy and I passed the twenty-year mark in our marriage, and it seemed to me that a marathon achievement of that order merited some kind of special celebration. What then could be nicer than to escape the cold of winter for a few days by going to a Caribbean island -- the Dominican Republic, for example where we could soak up the sun, loll on the beach, and maybe down a pina colada or two under the swaying palms? Please don't misunderstand; Judy and I are hardly swingers. Indeed, it is fair to say that my own social outlook is quite conservative.... I was interested in the paradise and not in the swinging. ... All I wanted was a crack at some sunshine, a quiet stretch of beach, and those swaying palms -- all this at a guaranteed first-class resort. Innocent enough, no? Larry, however, would have none of it. He expressed amazement that an Orthodox Jew could even contemplate going to Club Med, citing it as a classic example of Orthodox "compartmentalization," i.e., the process whereby modern Orthodox Jews -- those deeply enmeshed in modern secular culture separate out the Jewish from the non-Jewish aspects of their lives. Compartmentalization has both its defenders and detractors, and I have always been counted among the latter. Indeed, in a Spring 1982 symposium in Tradition,' I went so far as to label compartmentalization the "Frankenstein" of modern Orthodoxy, arguing instead for "synthesis," the creative blending of the best elements of Jewish tradition and modern culture. To me, an Orthodox Jew vacationing at Club Med -- taking care not to violate the kashrut laws, saying the afternoon prayers on a wind-swept beach, etc., etc. -- represented the epitome of synthesis. Yet here was Larry accusing me -- me of all people -- of being a compartmentalized modern Orthodox type.... Compartmentalization also arises in avoiding seeing that one is arriving at conflicting answers when standing in each of the different "worlds". The current youth of the Modern Orthodox world face this dilemma when asked about the social acceptability of homosexuality. Their Torah says one thing, their culture says another, and for the majority, their answers are inconsistent depending on time and context. The other possible response is failed synthesis -- compromise. How can I get done what I want to get done without violating any of the law? I might fish for leniencies, I might be doing something that is opposite in thrust and goal to all of tradition, but I will find some way to work my goal into what I can of the rule set. Take for example the woman who belongs to JOFA, attends a Woman's Prayer Group, and doesn't cover her hair. What's the justification for the WPG? Well, if you look at the sources, you can navigate a services that is similar in feel to a minyan, but does not actually cross any of the lines spelled out in the text. The cultural tradition that this isn't where women's attention belongs is ignored, in favor of the desideratum -- being able to serve G-d in as nearly an egalitarian experience as possible. However, when it comes to covering her hair, she whittled halakhah in another direction. There, the texts are quite clear. It's the cultural tradition that historically has been lax. And yet it's the presumption that these Eastern European women of the 19th and early 20th century must have had a source that drives her leniency. (RYBS himself was opposed to such prayer groups, allowing them only in kiruv settings. And yet here is an entire subcommunity of people who consider themselves his students or students of his students who figured out a way to come to peace with the idea.) Whether right or wrong, RYBS himself was against such prayer groups. Their approach is not a product of his worldview. And yet, the majority of those in the US who support them believe themselves to be disciples of his path in Torah. ... In short I identified a number of gaps between Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy and his followers: * The masses are incapable of creating halakhah, and shouldn't try. * The feeling of the "erev Shabbos Jew" eludes modern man. * Most people are not intellectually or academically inclined, and so encounter the contemporary world at a lower plane than Rav Soloveitchik envisions. * Because of the above, rather than navigating the tensions of two noble callings, thereby being religious beings who sanctify, rather than retreat from the world, the more common responses are: + compartmentalizing, and simply living in different worlds depending on the setting, + using that compartmentalization to find rulings that fit desired goals, and/or + compromising both their observance and their ideals in an attempt to be "normal". To look at all of these points and criticizing the ideal is unfair. No large group manage to live fully up to their ideals. And other ideals simply have other dangers. For example, while we identified an Orthodox-lite subgrouping within Modern Orthodoxy. But isn't the Chareidi who hides behind chitzoniyus (externalities) his suit and black hat in order to think of himself as "frum" rather than leveraging it to reinforce a self-image and the calling it demands, equally "lite"? However, I asserted that not only isn't RYBS's philosophy working as well as it might, trying to apply it to the masses exposes that make it less workable even in principle. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:46:40PM -0400, Joshua Meisner via Avodah wrote: : Is v'chol ma'asecha yihyu l'shem Shamayim davka or lav davka, or is there : room for secondary - and competing - values? You are using this formulation to conflate DE or mada with doing things for one' own hana'ah, and I think that muddies the issue rather than clarifies. ... : I suggested in a response that the Shulchan Aruch in this siman (and a : handful of others) was dipping a toe across the line between halacha and : aggadah, the former being a set of hard lines that either tell us what we : can never do ("Electric fence Judaism") or tell us what we need to do : during finite periods of time in our lives ("Time-share Judaism") while the : latter is a fuzzy (although equally real) entity covering an infinite : portion of space (hyperspace?) that takes on the illusion of lines when : viewed piecemeal. There is a basic paradox in the Ramban's "menuval birshus haTorah". If "qedoshim tihyu" is in the Torah and prohibits being that menuval, it's not "birshus haTorah", is it? This points to a basic ambiguity in what we mean by halakhah. And therefore while I think I agree with you in substance, I disagree with the terminoloyg. To my mind, the SA is not so much dipping a to "dipping a toe across the line between halacha and aggadah" as he is including the halakhah that one is obligated to do more than the black-letter law. In nearly all of the SA he spells out what the black-latter is, but the Mechaber does have to codify the din that that's only the floor, and doing nothing to go beyond that din is itself no less assur. Much the way Hilkhos Dei'os is just that -- HILKHOS Dei'os. ... : R' Micha, in a response to my invocation of R' Shkop, made the correct : observation that sometimes downtime can also be holy... What some may find striking, RSS includes mitzvos bein adam laMaqom in this notion of only being qadosh because it's caring for the goose, whereas BALC is the golden eggs. He writes about "'qedoshim tihyu' -- perushin tihyu" (emphasis added): Then anything he does even for himself, for the health of his body and soul, he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy. For THROUGH THIS HE CAN ALSO BENEFIT THE MASSES. Through the good he does for himself he can benefit the many who rely on him.... And based on what we have explained, the thesis of the mitzvah of avoidance is essentially the same as the underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is practically recognizable in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person causes or does even BETWEEN HIM AND THE OMNIPRESENT. We rest and enjoy to maintain our bodies and psyche, and we do mitzvos in order to maintain our souls, but the definition of qedushah is commitment leheitiv im hazulas. And perishus is perishus from anything that we're using as a distraction from that life's mission. Very much "vekhol maasekha yihyu lesheim Shamayim", even if many of those actions are lesheim Shamayim only at one remove. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Feeling grateful to or appreciative of someone http://www.aishdas.org/asp or something in your life actually attracts more Author: Widen Your Tent of the things that you appreciate and value into - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF your life. - Christiane Northrup, M.D. From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 15:43:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 18:43:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190714224310.GA4718@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: : I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data : and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent : value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if : it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and : perform some sort of kinyan on. : I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on : worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than : the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes. Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah. And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin, the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah (AhS CM 66:18). Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef. And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef. : Next topic... : I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card : transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I : choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the : sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My : ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is : totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate : transaction.... Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh? Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan. No? On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos) : I think they are saying something else... : However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva : of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed. Thank you for the correction. I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv. Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:17:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:17:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Darshening etim In-Reply-To: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> References: <87D110C3-B617-41F7-BB78-0D522CAF264D@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190714201756.GB13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:06:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The language of the story has his students questioning what will happen to : all his previous drashot and his answering he'll get reward anyway. The : answer doesn't seem to directly address the question. Perhaps they were : asking whether the halacha will change or will other drashot be found : to replace these? Maybe this is proof to the Raaavad that derashos were found /after/ the din was known? And even according to the Rambam, I don't see how Shimshon haAmsoni could have confidence in any dinim he created with a derashah he wasn't sure would work yet. The experiment only makes sense if he was looking to source pre-existing dinim. So I would think the Rambam too might consider this story an exception. As further evidence, Hilkhos Mamrim gives a beis din, not an individual to create laq through derashah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 13:52:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 16:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hallel and Tfillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714205228.GC13736@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:05:12PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Why do we take off tfillin before [Mussaf] on Rosh Chodesh but before : [Hallel] (for those who wear tfillin) on Chol Hamoed? I would limit this question to Pesach. Chol haMo'ed Sukkos is a real Hallel. If you want to compare, we need to look at another example of "Half Hallel". As for the incongruity of holding the lulav and esrog with tefillin on, as first that seemed a good rationale. But then I recalled the Rambam, who commended the hanhagah of holding 4 minim whenever possible throughout the day -- including Shacharis! But still, whole Halllel makes it different, it's a real chag element. Half Hallel is fake and to me poses more of a question. (And in any case is a closer comparison to RC.) So, why is ChM *Pesach* different than RC? Well, the Rama (OC 25:12) tells you to remove both before Mussaf. It's the Magein Avraham (s"q 41) quoting another Rama - R' Menachem Azaria miFano -- who says that the tzibbur should remove their tefillin before Hallel. And the Chazan still after Hallel. The first day of ChM Pesach is considered in some minhagim to be a special case because leining includes veYaha ki Veyiakha. And so they take their tefillin off after leining. The Choq Ya'aqov (490:2) brings this rationale to explain the Rama's position of *always* leaving them on until Mussaf. Extended by the other days mishum lo pelug. I don't have an answer I am happy with. Maybe because even a Half-Hallel on Pesach is devar yom beyomo, and therefore more about the chag than for RC. But as I said, I don't find that compelling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Imagine waking up tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp with only the things Author: Widen Your Tent we thanked Hashem for today! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:29:06 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] A Day to Disconnect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714172906.GA25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 12:51:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : R Micha Berger points out that many of the melachos involve truly creative : acts that changed the physical world, and were ever-present in our agrarian : society of millennia ago. If I'm understanding him correctly, he sees a : disconnect between that sort of Shabbos rest, as opposed to the emphasis on : disconnecting from electronic media, which are not very creative at all, : and certainly not as creative as planting seeds or building houses. I wasn't clear then. (Which is unsurprising, as I was trying the impossible task of sharing something that felt like an epipheny.) The "they" I am making the observation about aren't marketing Shabbos as a break from being able to get pictures of our grandchildren from another country, or writing a love note to your spouse or even sharing a thiank you or making a shidduch. People want a day to disconnect because of the stresses that online and phone life bring. So we're talking about the stressful elements of on-line life; not on-line life in general. I am not saying that being online is inherently uncreative. And certainly not un-melakhah, if we're defining melakhah as "creative / constructive work". Obviously, there are issues of havarah, koseif, derabbanans if any music plays, maybe boneh if you plug anything in, makeh bepatish, whatever... I am saying the stuff that makes online life stressful or eat away at the time we could be interacting on a more human level isn't the creative stuff. They're selling Shabbos as a break from killing time (or subotimally using time) on line. From trying to keep up with too many news stories and two many conversations with friends that will be forgotten in a day anyway. Which is very different than a break from creating. It is that particular aspect of on-line life, the very aspexct they're using to market Shabbos, that I am contrasting with the more constructive lifestyles of our ancestors. But in any case, both require a day to take a step back and think about where we'ee headed. A break from constructive work, so that we can make sure we're best using our time to produce what HQBH would "Desire". Us, to remember not to get lost in our favorite echo chamgers and dabate fora altogether.. But they're very different usages of Shabbos. And the difference reflects poorly on us. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We look forward to the time http://www.aishdas.org/asp when the power to love Author: Widen Your Tent will replace the love of power. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - William Ewart Gladstone From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 11:55:24 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:55:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mayim Acharonim, Chova? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714185523.GA6677@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:39:06PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Please see https://ohr.edu/this week/insights into halacha/5285 ... :> Insights into Halacha :> Mayim Acharonim, Chova? :> by Rabbi Yehuda Spitz : Mayim Acharonim has an interesting background, as it actually has : two entirely different sources and rationales mandating it. The first, : in Gemara Brachos[3], discussing the source for ritual handwashing, : explains that one can not make a bracha with dirty hands, and cites : the pasuk in Parshas Kedoshim[4] "V'hiskadeeshtem, V'heyisem Kedoshim", : "And you shall sanctify yourselves, and be holy". The Gemara clarifies : that "And you shall sanctify yourselves" refers to washing the hands : before the meal, Mayim Rishonim, and "and be holy" refers to washing : the hands after the meal, Mayim Acharonim. In other words, by washing : our hands before making a bracha (in this case before Bentching), we : are properly sanctifying ourselves. : The second source, Gemara Chullin[5], on the other hand, refers to Mayim : Acharonim as a "chova", an outright obligation. The Gemara elucidates that : there is a certain type of salt in the world, called 'Melach S'domis', ... Back when R Rich Wolpoe introduced me on-list to the work of Prof Agus's position on the origins of Ashkenazi pesaq, nusach and minhag, I noted something about mayim acharonim that could explain why Tosafos and the SA end up with different positions. According to Agus's theory (and further developed by Prof Ta-Shma and others), the bulk of Ashkenaz originated in EY. Captives from EY ended up in Rome and Provence, and when Charlamaign tried to moved the economic center of the Holy Roman Empire north, the Jews converged on the land we call Ashkenaz. Sepharad, however, is more directly a chlid of Bavel and the Ge'onim. This explains why there are often divergences in Ashk pesaq from the conclusion in the Bavli -- but position that end up having support in the Y-mi or medrashei halakhah. Because those sources more accurately reflect the ancestors of Ashk. (Which is why, as another quick example, when Ashk adopted Seder R Amram Gaon, it preserved the Nusach EY LeDor vaDor for use after Qedusah, and Shalom Rav for evenings.) Well, turns out the Y-mi only mentions malach sedomis, and doesn't have the comparison to mayim rishonim or the notion of qedushah. So I found it unsurprising that Ashk, comng from a community that saw mayim acharonim only in terms of avoiding blindness or other injury, would minimize it once the risk is gone. However, in Seph, it's a matter of qedushah too, so the SA's sources will be machmir even without melach sedomis being served anymore. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant http://www.aishdas.org/asp of all expense. Author: Widen Your Tent -Theophrastus - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 12:05:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 15:05:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] psak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714190539.GB6677@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:19:15AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : When the gemara has an Ibaye d'lo Ifshita (unresolved question), is the : practical halachic process going forward any different from one where : it closes with teiku? If so, how? According to the Yam shel Shelomo (BQ 2:5), teiqu closes the conversation. If Chazal say it's unresolvable, we lack the authority to resolve the question. And so the question must be resolved using rules of safeiq deOraisa lehachmir, or derabbanan lehaqil. But an ibayei delo ishita can be pasqened, a poseiq who feels he is bari can take sides. The Shach quotes the YsS and disagrees, saying that teiqu is indeed identical to IdLI. The Shach doesn't believe Chazal would never close a question without having their own pesaq/im. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is http://www.aishdas.org/asp excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety: Author: Widen Your Tent 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya From micha at aishdas.org Sun Jul 14 10:41:11 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:41:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] what language did Bilaam speak? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190714174110.GB25282@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 02:58:05PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : 1. What language did he converse with G-d and with Balak? Pictures, mental impages. Given that these are then wrapped by the prophet's brain in the familiar, it must have seemed to Bil'am that Hashem was speaking in Be'or's voice in the Aramaic of his youth. I have nothing for 2 & 3 worth sharing. (Although if you take the Rambam's daas yachid that the donkey speaking was part of the nevu'ah, and not physical speech, the same answer would apply.) ... : 4. What language did the angel speak to him since angels don't speak : Aramaic. Something I learned from your nephew, haR' Mordecai Kornfeld. Tosafos (Shabbos 12b, "she'ein mal'akhei hashareis") ask about this notion that they don't speak Aramaic? Mal'akhim can hear thoughts! I am not clear if they are asking mima nafshakh, if they can hear the thoughts they can understand the words used to explain them. Or if T is saying that even if they didn't understand the Aramaic, they would understand the tefillah by reading the thoughts directly. (The Gra [on OC 101:11] brings a source for Tosafos's assumption that mal'akhim can hear our thoughts.) The Rosh (Berakhos 2:2) answers that mal'akhim act like they don't understand a tefillah Aramaic because of the chutzpah of using an almost-Hebrew rather than Hebrew itself. Perhaps we could answer your queestion by saying that for Bil'am, the decision not to use Hebrew wouldn't be considered chutzpah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When a king dies, his power ends, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but when a prophet dies, his influence is just Author: Widen Your Tent beginning. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Soren Kierkegaard From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 15:03:32 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings Message-ID: Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not balanced. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ Here's a little spoiler from it: > That?s why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. No, there's no typos there. Nor even any sarcasm (though I suppose some might call it a bit tongue-in-cheek). Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jul 15 14:13:37 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilas Haderech on a Cruise Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I am going on a several-day cruise. When do I recite Tefilas Haderech? A. One recites Tefilas Haderech on the first day when the boat leaves the city. However, Minchas Shlomo (2:60:4) writes that it is questionable as to whether one can recite Tefilas Haderech on the subsequent days, since the boat continues traveling by day and by night. Ordinarily, during a trip when one stops to go to sleep, this acts as a break, and one is required to recite a new bracha in the morning. However, in this case the boat continues to travel even while the passengers are sleeping. It is therefore questionable whether sleeping on a boat constitutes an interruption. To avoid this issue, one should incorporate Tefilas Haderech into Shmoneh Esrei in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, which also ends with the bracha of ?Shomei?a tefilla.? If the boat were to dock in a port overnight, then one could recite the bracha of Tefilas Haderech in the morning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Jul 15 17:34:54 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? Message-ID: Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 15 22:42:05 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:42:05 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:17 AM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not > balanced. > > https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > > > One word: Apologetics But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Jul 15 23:24:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 02:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <264ae409-3b54-ff6a-2d88-33a97005b194@sero.name> On 15/7/19 8:34 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av.? Do we know when > Miriam passed away? Yes. Nissan 10th. > Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? Probably the same day, but surely no later than the next day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From gil.student at gmail.com Tue Jul 16 05:46:22 2019 From: gil.student at gmail.com (Gil Student) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:46:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings Message-ID: See here for the view of the Maharshdam (16th century) https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/05/are-women-better/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? -- Gil Student From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:39:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender inequality in Jewish weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716143908.GA9546@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 06:03:32PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not : balanced. : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ : : : Here's a little spoiler from it: : > That's why the bride plays a more active role in a traditional : > Jewish wedding, while the groom is more passive. But untrue. We Ashkenazim have a minhag to walk around the man 7 times. Unlike the man's giving a kesuvah and declaration, not to mention her entering /his/ chuppah, a regional minhag, and obviously not me'aqev. And while we're talking about not me'aqev, who does the bedekin? Whether the Ashkenazi version or the Sepharadi at-the-beginning-of-the aisle form, in both cases it's the man who is active. She picks up her finger to accept the ring. In a sense, it's demonstating that the qiddushin is with her agreement. But it's part of *his* giving the ring. Calling that her dominating the show is specious. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:42:05AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source : which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" : than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often : quoted in this context, is there anybody earlier? I found mention of this idea in Tanchuma Pinechas 7:1, and Bamidbar Rabba 21:10, on benos Tzelafchad. In both cases, the medrash notes a pattern: the women won't give to the eigel, they are the first to give to the Mishkan, and then benos Tzelfchad. "Hanashim goderos mah sheha'anashim portzim." Specitically that women treasure spiritual things more than man, more than calling them spiritual in general. I think both medrashim predate the berakhah of she'asani kirtzono. This point might be made by the Taz OC 46, who explains why the berakhah was coined as follows: even in the man's berakhah [shelo asani ishah] one sees the ma'alah of beri'as ha'ishah, but he doesn't need this ma'alah. Therefore shapir chayeves hi levareikh al ma'alah shelah, KN"L nakhon. (See there for the Taz's explanation of why "shelo asani Y" rather than "she'asani X".) But it is unclear whether he is saying that a woman has a ma'alah she must thank G-d for that is above zero, or above man's. He does distinguish this shelo asani ishah from the other two (goy and eved), which would imply the latter. But I can't say it's muchrach. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue Jul 16 04:19:39 2019 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:19:39 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Beautiful article about how the roles of the kallah and chasan are not >> balanced. >> https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lord-or-lady-of-the-rings-should-an-orthodox-chuppah-be-more-gender-balanced/ > But I have a related question: does anyone know the first Jewish source > which claims like this blogger that women have more "natural spirituality" > than men, and links this idea to "she`asani kirtzono"? RSRH is often quoted > in this context, is there anybody earlier? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden Synagogue in London, UK. She was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY. She received her Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Brooklyn College and her MBA from the University of Alberta. She previously served the community in Edmonton, AB Canada. Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? -- Eli Turkel From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jul 16 07:56:47 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 10:56:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Gender Inequality in Jewish Weddings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190716145647.GA28983@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:19:39PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: :> Rabbanit Batya Friedman is the senior rebbetzin of Hamsptead Suburb Garden :> Synagogue in London, UK... : Anyone know what the title "senior rebbetzin" means in this shul in London? Going to the shul's web site , the picture of the first of the couples on the shul's team is labeled "RABBI DANIEL & RABBANIT BATYA FRIEDMAN SENIOR RABBINIC COUPLE". Click on the picture and you get their bios. She is also the first rebbetzin (as you or I would call them) interviewed in the Jewish Action article at . So, she prefers "rabbanit" to rebbetzin (see the JA article), and the couple are billed as teammates. But to answer the question I assume you are asking, we're not talking about a woman in one of the new clergy definitions (Maharat or Yoetzet). In any case, the original article sounded to me more like kiruv fare about white tablecloths, the kind RYBS was bothered by, than about the later trend of accomodating feminist sensibilities in particular. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From JRich at sibson.com Wed Jul 17 04:50:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 11:50:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] "When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, 'It means just what I choose it to mean-neither more or less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master-that's all"). This point was driven home to me by a shiur (way too long to summarize maareh mkomot available) I put together on the minhag of some women not to do mlacha ("work" TBD-another Humpty Dumpty word?) on Rosh Chodesh. The Yerushalmi (Taanit 1:6) is the only Talmudic source specifically mentioning this practice in a list of practices some of which are considered "minhagim" and some not. [I assumed the practical application is whether one needs to be matir neder to stop]. In comparing this practice with mlacha on chol hamoed and during Chanukah candles, I reached the following tentative conclusions: 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice (which can include when and why) in order to determine current applications. I'm not sure how much they take into account alternative possible narratives. 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., mlacha, candle lighting). 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Your Thoughts? 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 Jul 17 09:19:35 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:19:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:50:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Minhag is one of those Humpty Dumpty words ([like Chazakah?] ... I don't think so, for either word. The problem is that both refer to facts, not halachic categories. And the same fact needn't be the same halakhah. Minhag means that which is done. It could be commonly done because a particular ruling became accepted in some region as the law (bet yosef chalaq) or as beyond the law (glatt), by a given person ("I don't use community eiruvin"), etc... A chazaqah is a presumption. We presume when something would be true by normal laws of nature or human nature (chazaqa disvara), or because it's what we saw last time we check and we do not expect change (chazaqa demei'iqara). Sheiv Shemaatsa (6:22) proves that chazaqa disvara has no bearing in a case of terei uterei. Specific case "ein adam chotei velo lo" does not give one set of eidim more neemanus than the other. However, a chazaqa demei'iqara would still stand even after eidim disagree about whether the metzi'us changed. But the word still means only one thing -- "held" to be true. Similarly, gerama means causation. But the scope of what is gerama differ when the topic is melakhah or when it's neziqin -- because neziqin splits between gerama and garmi. Not because the word is wobbly. The nafqa mina in this bit of linguistic theory is to be on the alert when learning: Brisker Lomdus spends a lot of effort on chalos sheim. So you pick up a habit that words are labels and should be 1:1 with halachic categories. And besides, we take buzzwords and apply the same buzzwords to disparate sugyos -- cheftza vs gavra was borrowed from nedarim and shevu'os! But it's not a consistently valid habit. Not everything is indeed intended as a buzzword for a halachic category. Halakhah may not even be about where to apply labels. Brisk might not be the only emes. : 1. There is not always a strong mesorah for the source of minhagim. Except according to Rambam Hil' Mamrim ch 2.2 "BD shegazeru gezeirah or tiqenu atanah *vehinhigu minhag*", who seems to say minhagim are established by beis din -- or perhaps posqim in general. But I think most assume minhag, of all sorts, means grass roots. Which is then verified post-facto: : 2. Later, authorities use what data they can collect related to the : specific minhag to establish a narrative for the original practice... : 3. The narratives may also be impacted by a desire to cohere definitions : and/or rules amongst multiple tangentially related practices (e.g., : mlacha, candle lighting). Not sure how often this happens outside of... well, I hate to say it again, but outside of Brisk. RYBS rewrote much of the 3 weeks based on a theory that minhag must follow halachic forms, and therefore each stage of aveilus in the Ashk minhagim of 3 weeks must parallel a stage of aveilus derabbanan for a parent r"l. But his pesaqim are idiosyncratic. : 4. Halachic intuition plays a very strong role in determining "good" : and "not so good" minhagim. (Maybe of the nature of "what would I have : seen/done if I were a poseik back when the minhag was forming?") Also in pesaq. I think "libi omer li" followed by seeing if the seikhel can formally confirm what the heart said is a far more common pesaq approach than we usually discuss. But we can argue how strong of a role it plays in pesaq some other time. As I have said here frequently, the difference between a moreh hora'ah ("Yoreh? Yoreh!", ie a poseiq) and stam a learned guy is shimush. (Sotah 22a) Why do you need the hands-on time with a rebbe, why isn't having your head filled with the right facts enough? Because pesaq is an art, requiring a feel for the subject. Or in your words, "developing an intuition". So I don't think #4 is a rule about minhag. It's a rule in hora'ah in general. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 17 09:39:40 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: <20190717163940.GB23535@aishdas.org> AhS OC 11:13-15 discusses where to thread the tzitzis strings through the beged. Too far from the edge, and it's not being put al qanfei bigdeihem. Too close to the edge, and the string is itself part of the qanaf, and not "al". (Although the Tur says only the bottom edges have a "too close", there is no too close to the side. But the SA s' 10 says the shiur is in both directions.) So, the maximum is 3 godlim, and the minimum is qesher agodel, which the AhS (citing SA hArav, "haGR"Z") says is 2 godlim. So, tzitzis has to be hung between 2 and 3 godlim from the edges of the beged. 2 godlin is 4 cm (R C Naeh) to 5 cm (CI). 3 godlin would be 6 cm to 7.5cm So the only way to be machmir would be hanging one's tzitzis between 5 and 6 cm from the edges. Closer to 5, since the Rambam's amma (and thus all units of length) is shorter than RCN's. I'm just saying, it's a very small window. OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 17 12:33:44 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> References: <20190717161935.GA23535@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <60cb5b6a-e75f-3f1e-f7c8-bd290651b0d6@sero.name> See Bava Basra 2a, Tosfos dh "Bigvil", towards the end. "But less than this, even if it is customary, this is an inferior custom. This proves that there are customs on which one should not rely, even in cases where the Mishna says that 'it all follows the local custom'". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From rygb at aishdas.org Fri Jul 19 13:01:42 2019 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:01:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Back to the barricades! The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ Nothing new has happened since the infamous cRc contretemps, which was addressed here. Anything that the Star-K claims is only muttar b'sh'as ha'dchak is really muttar l'chatchilah. See https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#STARBUCKS%20COFFEE%20AND%20NOSEIN%20TAAM ff. KT, GS, YGB From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jul 19 08:24:35 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:24:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. I am learning to play a musical instrument. May I practice during the Three Weeks? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis A. One who is learning to play an instrument may practice during the Three Weeks. It is permitted since this is a learning experience and thus is not considered deriving pleasure from the music. Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks (Moadei Yeshurun p. 151:18 citing Noam Vol. 11 p. 195). However, after Rosh Chodesh Av it is preferable that this be done in a secluded place (ibid. 151:19 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt?l). There are those who prohibit practicing after Rosh Chodesh Av (Shearim HaMetzuyanim B?Halacha 122:2) when the mourning over the destruction of the Bais HaMikdash intensifies, since there would normally not be a negative effect if one doesn?t practice for nine days (Shu?t Betzeil HaChochma Vol. 6:61). Others prohibit practicing only during the week in which Tisha B?Av falls (Shu?t Tzitz Eliezer Vol. 16:19) when the mourning intensifies even further. In light of the statement "Only listening to music which evokes pleasure is prohibited during the Three Weeks" I wonder if I am allowed to listen to most modern day music with gives me no pleasure during the 3 weeks. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 08:34:23 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:34:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When did Moshe hit the rock? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Avodah V37n57, R'Sholom asked: > Somebody was musing last shabbos: Aharon died on 1 Av. Do we know when Miriam passed away? Do we know when Moshe hit the rock? < OU Webpage (found via Google'ing ) says Miriam died 10 Nisan; the same set of Webpages says MRAH hit the rock on 23 Iyyar. An online copy of Seder Olam Rabba says (unless I'm misunderstanding it) that Miriam died on R'Ch' Nisan (see Ch. 9); I don't see any rock-hitting dates there or in an online copy of Seder Olam Zutta . Looking forward to others' thoughts.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:37:39 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:37:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux Message-ID: . R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer posted: > Back to the barricades! > The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. > https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As far as I can tell, the information on that Star-K page is exactly the same as what they had posted a year ago, specifically July 20 2018. No new information at all, except that the bottled drinks used to be in the top section, and now they are in the bottom section. There is a wonderful website at https://web.archive.org/ which archives copies of websites, specifically to enable us to see what a webpage *used* to say. If you go to that site, and paste in the link that RYGB gave us, it will tell you that the page has been "Saved 84 times between November 7, 2015 and July 13, 2019.", and you can click to read any of them. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Jul 21 16:53:07 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 19:53:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your > tallis qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're > too close to the corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need > kosher tzitzis anyway! OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 18:36.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:41:52 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:41:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Hanging_Tzitzis_to_fulfil_all_opini?= =?utf-8?q?ons_--_can_it_be_done=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: > OTOH, you don't need to worry about a measure for that minimum > 2 godlin from the corner that is so large that it implies your tallis > qatan isn't chayav in tzitzis. Because then, if you're too close to the > corner, who cares -- the garment doesn't need kosher tzitzis anyway! Not sure I understand this paragraph, but that's not why I'm responding. You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:33:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722133328.GB1026@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 07:53:07PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : OT1H, if you are relying on shitos that "the garment doesn't need kosher : tzitzis anyway," then perhaps you should be careful not to wear it on : Shabbos outside the eruv! (For more details, Shmirat Shabbat K'Hilchata : 18:36.) I'm back at the beginning of AhS, learning tzitzis again, thus the question. And RYME also discusses this issue. OC 13:2 discusses a tallis that definitely needs tzitzis, and says it may be worn on Shabbos. Even a silk tallis, even those who hold that only wool or linen begadim require tzitzis deOraisa, the chiyuv derabbanan is enough to be mevatel the tzitzis to the garment. If the tzitzis are mishum safeiq or not at all, no. And then the AhS ends (tr. mine): According to this, very small talisos, which do not have the shiur, it would be assur to go out on Shabbos into a reshus harabbim with them. But the world are nohagim heter. Ve'ulai sevira lehu that since this beged doesn't need tzitzis at all, the tzitzis have no chashivus for this begd, and are batel. (And is is written in the the Be'er Heitev that in Teshuvas haRama siman 110 he is mefalpel in this matter, but I don't have it tachas yadi now to look into it.) So, to explain minhag Yisrael, RYME is willing to say that for safeiq chiyuv means the strings are too chashuv to be automatically batel, but safeiq no chiyuv means they may not be batel as a matir for the beged. But if there is no chiyuv at all, they would be batel like decorative buttons -- the tassles have no chashivus. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From doniels at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 02:01:07 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:01:07 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, zt?l In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Please see the article at > https://cross-currents.com/2019/06/09/rav-nosson-kamenetsky-ztl/ I only interacted with him once - at a Shiva house a few years ago. He sat next to me and at one point asked me who somebody - on the other side of the room - was. I had no idea. He then asked other people, and - this is the fascinating part - turned to me and informed me who this person was! It fascinates me every time I think of it. The menschlichkeit. - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 06:16:28 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Starbucks Redux In-Reply-To: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> References: <8a183bb3-4212-a266-7b3a-393632f63adc@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190722131628.GA1026@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:01:42PM -0400, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: : The Star-K has launched a frontal assault on Starbucks. : https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks/ As RAM already noted (but I already had more details in my draft of this email, so I'm sending it anyway), what was essentially this page went up some time between archive.org's scans of the page on May 18th and Jul 20th 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180518224907/20180720085723/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks The only change from last year and last week is that they fixed the placement of bottled drinks from the hot to the cold category. https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20180720085723/20180925130654/https://www.star-k.org/articles/kosher-lists/1709/starbucks As we concluded last year, they really say little about any change in kashrus at Starbucks. Rather, they warn you that Starbucks turned off their flow of information, so the star-K cannot make informed comments anymore. The changes in the charts between May and June 2018 reflects a loss of detail and a more general "X" where before the list was itemized and might have an "X" or two. Reflecting the increased uncertainty. But they don't actually say there is a problem. This is totally like the cRc which is saying certain regular practices there will treif up you coffee. The star-K is saying they cannot verify a lack of problem, and therefore they offer "safety" guidelines. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder] http://www.aishdas.org/asp isn't complete with being careful in the laws Author: Widen Your Tent of Passover. One must also be very careful in - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF the laws of business. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 04:50:34 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:50:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? Message-ID: . Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? If we know the answer to the above, is it cited anywhere in Choshen Mishpat? Imagine this case: An employer hires an architect to produce plans for a building involving a specific construction style. The architect warns the employer that City Hall might reject that style. The employer tells the architect to work on it anyway. As feared, the city rejects the plans, denies the building permits, and even confiscates the plans. The architect tells the employer, "I warned you very clearly that this might happen. Pay me anyway!" Who wins? It's not explicit in the pesukim, but Rashi (24:14 and 25:1) cites the Gemara (Sanhedrin 106a) that the business with the Moavi girls was Bil'am's idea. This is entirely separate from the above, because the above contract was very specifically to curse the Jews (Rashi on 22:4), and the whole chidush of this plan is that it would work totally independently of Bil'am's cursing abilities (or lack thereof). I can easily imagine how Bil'am approached Balak: "You wanted me to curse them, and I warned you that it might not work. I warned you not once but several times, and look what happened. Now listen, cursing is not going to work. Forget about it. But I have a different idea, which has much better odds." My question here is: (1) Did he volunteer this idea to Balak for free, out of the goodness of his antisemitic heart? (2) Or was he a pure mercenary, who (whether he got paid for the attempted cursing or not) saw an opportunity for another high-income contract? Just wondering, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Jul 22 10:40:09 2019 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:40:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:40 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately > unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? > I understand from Bemidbar 24:11 that Bil`am was not paid silver and gold by Balak as expected. However, he was paid the "iron price" in 31:8. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:37:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bil'am - paid or unpaid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722193732.GC13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 07:50:34AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Was Bil'am paid for his sincere and hard-fought -- but ultimately : unsuccessful -- attempts to curse us? I answered the wrong question, thinking you mean "paid" as in sekhar va'onesh, not did Balaq pay him. But I invested so much time on research, I'm keeping it in. (I was wondering why you went to CM rather than a straight "divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'im?" Took me a while to catch up.) But at least Bil'am was smart enough to say in advance that the payment couldn't be conditional upon success. While also planting in Balaq's head the ballpark of "melo veiso kesef vezahav". Clearly experienced in Middle Eastern haggling technique. (See 22:18) Now my non-answer, about whether HQBH made Bil'am pay for his sin. Bil'am died in Yehoshua 13:22, during Reuvein's conquest of Sichon's lands (which in turn included the land Sichon conqured from Moav). The pasuq calls him a qoseim. Sanhedrin 106a asks why, wasn't he an actual navi? R Yochanan says that Bil'am lost his nevu'ah and continued on as pretending he still had it. On the next amud, Rav says that this death involved seqilah, sereifah, hereg AND cheneq. According to Gittin 56b-57a, when Unkelos bar Kalonikos (where Kalonikos's mom was Titus's sister) considers converting, he raises some evil people from the dead (including his uncle) to ask them information to help his decision. On 57a he asks Bil'am. Among the things Bil'am answers is that he is spending eternity "beshikhvas zera roteches". Rashi says this is middah keneged middah for his idea about Benos Moav. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten http://www.aishdas.org/asp your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, Author: Widen Your Tent and it flies away. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jul 22 12:09:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:09:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Hanging Tzitzis to fulfil all opinions -- can it be done? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190722190922.GB13379@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: : You seem to have forgotten that the AhS in 16:5 : (https://www.sefaria.org.il/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.16.5) : says that a Tallis Qatan doesn't require a minimum Shiur. : : In which case it would require Kosher Tzitzis - what am I missing? Well, first, could be derabbanan. Second, he doesn't go that far, as you may have seen in an email I wrote on this thread after yours, because when it comes to hilkhos Shabbos and hotza'ah, RYME doesn't consider the question that closed. In any case, I was saying lekhol hadei'os, just using the AhS's presentation of those dei'os. The question was how to thread the needle between the minimum distance of almost 2 godelim from the hole you thread the tzitzis to to the edges and the maximum of 3 gedolim if you want to be yotzei everyone from the CI's version of the minimum to the Rambam's version of the maximum. Inherently we are looking at shitos other than RYME's. Otherwise, we could just use his statement (OC 16:4) that the beged's 3/4 ammah is 9 vershok, yeilding a 53.3 ammah, from which we get a 2.2cm etzba. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jul 23 14:06:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:06:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet Message-ID: Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet). I thought this specific application (Eitzah) was forbidden under lfnei Iver (one practical difference would be what hatraah [warning] would be required if you must warn on the specific prohibition). Any thoughts?? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Tue Jul 23 14:10:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:10:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Conscience Message-ID: From "Conscience" - by Pat Churchland Conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry, not a theological entity thoughtfully parked in us by a divine being. It is not infallible, even when honestly consulted. It develops over time and is sensitive to approval and disapproval; it joins forces with reflection and imagination and can be twisted by bad habits, bad company, and a zeitgeist of narcissism. Not everyone develops a conscience (witness the psychopaths), and sometimes conscience becomes the plaything of morbid anxiety (as in scrupulants). The best we can do, given all this, is to aim for understanding how an impartial spectator might judge us. No good comes of insisting that unless conscience is infallible or religion provides absolute rules, morality has nothing to anchor it and anything goes. For one thing, such a claim is false. For another thing, we do have something to anchor it-namely, our inherited neurobiology. In addition, we have the traditions that are handed down from one generation to another and, to some degree, tested by time and over varying conditions. We do have institutions that embody much wisdom. Those are the anchors. Imperfect? Yes, of course. Still, an imperfect foundation is better than a phony foundation. What we don't want to do is fabricate a myth about infallible conscience or divine laws, peddle it as fact, and then get caught out when people come to realize, as they most assuredly will, that it was all made up. Thus a biological take on moral behavior and the conscience that guides it. [Me-my simple question to Dr. Churchland's which she did not respond to Dear Dr. Churchland I read your new book with great interest. While I would certainly love to discuss it with you I do have one question that I was hoping you might address. On page 147 you note that conscience is a brain construct rooted in our neural circuitry. My simple question is once one becomes aware of this fact, why should he feel bound to act according to his conscience? If such an individual had a ring of gyges, why would he choose not to use it to his full benefit? Lshitata - what would be the response? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 Jul 25 12:58:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Aruch haShulchan on Lishmah Message-ID: <20190725195815.GA13658@aishdas.org> In AhS OC 1:13, RYME is in the middle of a list of "yesodei hadas". (The list is incomplete; he refers you to the Rambam for the rest.) After he lists olam haba, genehom, bi'as mashiach and techiyas hameisim, RYME writes, "Similarly it is among the yesodei hadas that all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro, but because HQBH commanded us to do this. As two examples, he looks at Shabbos and Kibbud AvE, both of which he says are sikhli -- it is logical to take a day off "lechazeiq kochosav", and similar honoring one's parents shoudl be self evident. When these two diberos are described in Shemos, before the Cheit haEigel, Hashem simply tells us to do them. We were on the level of mal'akhim, of course we would do what Hashem wants because He wants it. But in Devarim, after the cheitm both diberos say "ka'asher tzivkha H' Elokekha". After the eigel, we need to be instructed in proper motive. I have a question about the AhS's "kegon mitzvos BALC". (See for the Hebrew to follow this.) Is he saying, "all the mitzvos are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro [are not performed bexause it is reasonable to do so]". Or is he saying, "all the mitzvos [maasios] are to be performed not because the seikhel obligates it, like [the way one performs] mitzvos BAL"Chaveiro". The Rambam is famously understood as distinguishing between: - mitzvos sikhlios, where we ARE supposed to internalize the values and then do them naturally because that's what we personally value, and between - mitzvos shim'iyos where it is superior to really like pork but refrain because Hashem said so. The AhS wants us to do every mitzvah in the second way. And so my question becomes -- does he really mean every mitzvah, or is he excluding at least most of mitzvos BALC? As the Alter of Slabodka writes: "Veahavta lereiakha komakha." That you should love your peer the way you love yourself. You do not love yourself because it is a mitzvah, rather, a plain love. And that is how you should love your peer. The pasuq, by saying kamokha, appears to exclude ahavas rei'im from the notion of performing specifically because HQBH commanded. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, http://www.aishdas.org/asp Our greatest fear is that we're powerful Author: Widen Your Tent beyond measure - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jul 25 12:34:33 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d Message-ID: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Do Jews and Moslems believe in the same G-d, they just are in error about many of His values and about some of the things He did? Or are any of these differences about claims that are definitional of Who Hashem Is, and therefore A-llah doesn't refer to the one True G-d? My question is clearer when we talk about Christianity. Is the trinity a misunderstanding about the Borei, or the depiction of a fictitious god? In AhS OC 1:14, RYME quotes the 3rd pesichah to the Seifer haChinukh about the 6 constant mitzvos. The first: To believe there there is one G-d in the world, Who created this great Creation. He was, Is and Will be until the end of time. He took us out from Mitzrayim and gave us the Torah. This is included in the verse of "I am H' your G-d who took you out of Mitzrayim." Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these things, you believe in a different G-d. And the phrasing of the first of the 10 Diberos does seem to back him up. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Fri Jul 26 07:43:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:43:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> On 25/7/19 3:34 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these > things, you believe in a different G-d. Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because you don't believe what the Torah says about Him. What if you do believe He did Yetzias Mitzrayim, but don't believe He defeated Sichon & Og? Either you think that's a made-up story, or you think it happened by itself, or even that some other god did that. None of these mean you don't believe in the same G-d. Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow believing in different gods. Or even if you do believe G-d makes each leaf fall, but you don't believe my claim that that specific leaf did fall, your line of reasoning might imply that we're believing in slightly different gods; in which case no two people really believe in the same G-d, which is either an absurd notion or a useless one, or both. If I'm not making sense, ascribe it to not enough coffee. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jul 26 11:20:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of G-d In-Reply-To: <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> References: <20190725193433.GA23682@aishdas.org> <720b35c2-cb38-02f3-0f5a-8e7dc0f68eba@sero.name> Message-ID: <20190726181959.GA24155@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:43:24AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : > Notice that for the purposes of the mitzvah of Emunah, believing in : > Yetzias Mitzrayim and Matan Torah are not distint mitzvos from belief : > in G-d. Rather, RYMS holds that if you do not believe Hashem did these : > things, you believe in a different G-d. : : Or, you believe in the same G-d but are not fulfilling the mitzvah, because : you don't believe what the Torah says about Him... But why aren't you fulfilling the mitzvah? Either the mitzvah has one part or multiple parts. Meaning: - The mitzvah has one part, to believe in HQBH, but without yetzi'as Mitzrayim and matan Torah the god you're believing in isn't him.(As I assumed. Or - The mitzvah requires belief in a list of (at least) three things. This second possiblity didn't cross my mind. Perhaps because the Chinukh calls the mitzvah the Chinukh called "leha'amin Bashem", not "leha'amin be-" list of items. AND< there are beliefs about HQBH that I would have thought would more natually have been on such a list -- (2) shelo lehaamin lezulaso and (3) leyachado. ... : Otherwise you end up saying that if I believe in a G-d Who intentionally : made the leaf I'm looking at fall when and where it did, and you believe in : an almost-identical G-d Who didn't make that decision, then we're somehow : believing in different gods... Or that these two events are unique, that they say something about Who Hashem Is that the leaf does not. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside http://www.aishdas.org/asp the person, brings him sadness. But realizing Author: Widen Your Tent the value of one's will and the freedom brought - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 10:51:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:06:53PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Vayikra 25:17 states, "V'lo tonu ish et amito" ("And you shall not wrong : one man his fellow Jew"). Rashi comments that this includes onaat dvarim, : which includes giving inappropriate advice (Eitzah Sheena Hogenet)... ... to the benefit of the yo'eitz. Which is why the pasuq continues "veyareisa meiElokekha, ki ani H' Elokeikhem" -- Someone Knows your motives. Which makes sense, given how ona'as mamon is also about taking advantage of the other for one's own benefit. So I think Rashi himself provides a chiluq. Onaas devarim is to help oneself, whereas lifnei iveir is to harm the advised. Not that that chiluq would help with hasraah, since the eidim aren't presumably mindreaders. I guess if the yo'eitz tells a third party what he's doing and why? (Eg When making fun of the rube.) But, is there an onesh for there to give hasraah for? Aside frm the BALM nature of either issur, they can be done with diffur alone -- lav she'ein bo maaseh. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For a mitzvah is a lamp, http://www.aishdas.org/asp And the Torah, its light. Author: Widen Your Tent - based on Mishlei 6:2 - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 12:32:11 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:32:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim Message-ID: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? Is this really al pi torah? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jul 31 12:51:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html : : What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and superstition? : Is this really al pi torah? It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document use among Jews. It traveled from Ancient Greece to Germany (as well as other Dutch countries) and also took root in Tukey. You can by Bliegiessen kits in Germany today. (Although generally they use tin, not lead, after the gov't clamped down on a practice that too ofen led to lead poisoning.) The word isn't even uniquely Yiddish. R Chaim Kanievsky reports (Segulos Rabbosseinu 338-336, source provided by R Shelomo Avineir) that there is no mention in the mishnah, gemara, rishonim, SA or Acharonim, "ein la'asos kein". R Aharon Yuda Grossman (VeDarashta veChaqata shu"t #22 permits on the grounds that there is no derekh Emori when something is being done for refu'ah (Shabbos 67a). Also relying heavily on the Rashba (teshuvah 113) To close with a witticism that reache me via R Eli Neuberger to RYGB, R Aharon Feldman (RY NIRC) responded, "Klal Yisroel has gone from being the Am Segula to the Am Segulos." Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late http://www.aishdas.org/asp to become the person Author: Widen Your Tent you might have been. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - George Eliot From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 13:55:08 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:55:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eitzah Sheena Hogenet In-Reply-To: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> References: <20190731175159.GB31328@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6f7c27e2-0f0f-5041-174c-85b7dcd348b5@sero.name> I don't understand how there can be hasra'ah here at all. If the witnesses see him giving a person what *they consider* to be bad advice, surely their duty is to give the person their own contrary advice. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed Jul 31 14:10:02 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:10:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/7/19 3:32 pm, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html > > What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and > superstition? Is this really al pi torah? That ayin hara is a real thing is definitely al pi torah. One must twist oneself into pretzels in order to *avoid* believing that the Torah endorses a literal belief in ayin hara kipshuto. Whether this person helps is surely an empirical question. If he has a record, then something he is doing works. How it works is another question. It could be that it's simply a matter of suggestion and making the subject believe that he is no longer under the ayin hara, whereupon that confidence actually effects the help. Or it could be (and this seems to me far more likely) that the help comes entirely from the hiddur mitzvah that he insists they adopt, and the rest is hocus-pocus whose purpose is to get them to adopt that hiddur. Third, it could be that this person has been given a power mil'maalah as a means of providing him with parnassah, no different in principle from the power that was temporarily given to Ovadia's widow to pour an unlimited amount of oil from a jug. Finally, our folk tradition has always included a belief not only in ayin horas but also in the ability to "whisper them away", and I see no reason why such an ability, if it exists, could not work remotely just as easily as it could in person. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com Wed Jul 31 14:37:17 2019 From: ygbechhofer at mail.gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> On Jul 31, 2019, 3:52 PM, at 3:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:32:11PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/promotions/1767439/removing-ayin-horah-remotely-from-yerusholayim-3.html >> What have we come to? Is this what we believe in, magic and >superstition? >It seems that molybdomancy (from the Greek molybdos, meaning: lead) >has clear and well established precedent before its earliest document >use among Jews. ... And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. KT, YGB Sent from BlueMail From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Jul 31 23:57:01 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:57:01 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold reading ?I?m surprised at your surprise. This is classic cold reading. He listed many, many possibilities at various degrees of vagueness. You say the he accurately predicted the shoulder and arm pain, but what he actually predicted was different: problems [not pain] in the right shoulder area [not the right shoulder] OR some completely unrelated and very common condition (stress from a close family member). As it turns out, point prevalence of shoulder pain is up to 26% with lifetime incidence of shoulder pain is up to 70% https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03009740310004667 The part where you gave him a second chance was also not surprising. You didn't object to the "issue with her head around about nose height" so he guessed sore throat another common malady. His self-description of his own successes are of no probative value whatsoever. A much better test would be to identify 5 people with a given ailment and 5 without and let him tell you which is which. Your test had not real success criterion nor were there any control subjects.? On Thursday, August 1, 2019, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: > And yet recently R. Natan Slifkin on his blog was taken aback by the > apparent accuracy of the performance of a blei gissen by a friend of his. > > KT, > YGB > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 1 03:30:57 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 06:30:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Removing Ayin Horah Remotely from Yerusholayim In-Reply-To: References: <20190731195154.GA12390@aishdas.org> <1f7ce223-6b70-40f3-b623-04191f92fef3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190801103057.GB21804@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: : As one of the commenters on the blog pointed out this is classic cold : reading ... We need to separate two concernts: 1- Does it work? 2- Is it Mutar? I believe RNS would say it neither works nor is permissible. Whereas RYGB would say is could well work, but would still be assur. History says it's darkhei Emori. So the question could be how one undestands the idea that something done for medince trumps derekh Emori. Does the intent matir, or does it need to be established as effective? (And it culd well have been wrongsly "proven" effective, but lo nitnah haTorah lemal'akhei hashareis.) And why do the Chakhamim say (Shabbos 61a) prohibit carrying a foxes tooth (even during the week)? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 10:27:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ashkenaz and Minhag Eretz Yisrael Message-ID: <20190802172709.GA28558@aishdas.org> So, I noticed three cases in the AhS recently where Sepharadim end up doing what's in Shas, and Ashkenazim follow (or followed and then acharonim were machmir lekhol hadei'os) what one finds in the Yerushalmi. New data for an old topic. So I'm CC-ing RRW. 1- 18:2-3 Rambam says tzitzs are needed during the day, regardless of the kind of garment. Rosh says tzitzis are required on a kesus yom, or a kesus yom valayalah, but not a kesus laylah -- regardless of when it is worn. The AhS explains the Rosh's position based on the Sifri and the Y-mi. Sepharadim hold like the Rambam. The Rama ends up with the chumeros of both -- don't wear a kesus yom during the night nor a kesus laylah during the day without tzitzis, but in eihter case -- no berakhah (safeiq berakhos lehaqeil). 2- 25:10 Menachos 36a: if you didn't talk between tefillin shel yad and shel rosh, make one berakhah. (Which Rashi understands to mean on both. Tosafos say it means if you speak, repeat "lehaniach tefillin" to make two berakhos on the shel rosh.) But in any case, the Yerushalmi and Tankhuma (Bo) have the two berakhos as Ashkenazim say them. 3- 31:4 -- tefillin on ch"m The AhS says it depends on whether the "os" of YT is 1- itzumo shel yom 2- issur melakhah 3- matzah or sukkah, respectively And if it's the issur melakhah, which the AhS focuses on, whether the issur melakhah on ch"m is deOraisa or deRabbanan. If it's deOraisa, then wearing tefillin would be a statement of rejection / belittling the os of ch"m. (Rashba teshuvah 690) But if the issur melakhah is derabbanan, one should wear tefillin on ch"m. (Rosh) Tosafos (Eiruvin 96a) say one is chayav, based on Y-mi MB ch. 3. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Aug 2 12:14:57 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina Message-ID: Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach amina? A guidebook I have (Understanding the Talmud, R Yitzchak Feigenbaum) says they are "structurally" the same. (He didn't say "equivalent" -- am I being medayek where I don't need to be)? Thoughts? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 6 12:16:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:16:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chumros - Justifications and Hediotim Message-ID: <20190806191636.GA13993@aishdas.org> Two thoughts about chumeros, both from learning hilkhos tefillin in the AhS. 1- AhS OC 29:3 -- not sure about "Brisker Chumeros" And now on to another topic... While keeping the above in my iPad collecting research, my chazarah brought me back to AhS OC 29:3. The Benei Maaravah hold that it is outright issur to wearing tefillin at night, based on "venishmartem me'od lemishmarti". The Rambam holds like them, but most rishonim -- and thus all but Teimanim -- hold that mideOraisa it's okay to wear tefillin at night. Miderabbanan, there is a gezeira because maybe the wearer will fall asleep. (Ashkenazim don't HAVE to hold like EY over Bavel...) In 29:3 RYME mentions a minhag to take the retzu'ah of one's finger durin UVa leTetzion, at "Yehi Ratzon shenishmor chuqekha", lezeikher this shitah. He opened "ve'eini yodeia' im kedai laasos kein", since we don't hold like the gemara's Benei Maaravah. Besides, the Benei Maaravah themselves only made a berakhah "lishmor chuqav" when taking off tefillin at nightfall. I'm not sure if the AhS sees this in real Brisker chumerah terms: OT1H, he tells us he doesn't see value in a minhag to cover bases for a rejected shitah. OTOH, he appears to be talking about the berakhah, that it's in commemoration of a berakahh we don't make. On the third hand, he doesn't raise the concept itself that venishmartem links shemirah to taking off tefillin as justification. And on the 4th hand, that linkage wouldn't be making a chumerah to do what the Benei Maaravah hold must be done anyway. So is any of this that related to Brisker chumaros? What do you think? 2- AhS OC 32:17: Chumeros need justification Tefillin do not require shirtut after the first line, according to the SA the full frame, and according to the Rambam, no shirtut at all. You could consider having the lines anyway a nice chumerah, because it will make the lines of text neater. Or, we could follow the Y-mi Shabbos 1:2 7a, in which Chizqiyah says "Whoever is patur from something but does it [anyway], is called 'hedyot'." Totally different context (finishing a meal when Shabbos starts) but Tosafos (Menachos 32b "ha moridin") apply it here. The AhS then lets you know that the MA asks (which I thought would be obvious) but what about all the chumeros we do do with no fear of being a "hedyot"? So my next stop was MA sq 8, who tacked something on: "... is called 'hedyot' unless if he does it bederekh chumera". But here, it is a valid chumera, as the kesav will be neater. The MA invokes the Peri Megadim, who brings us to sitting in the Sukkah in the rain. Jumping ahead to AhS OC 639:20, he quotes the same Y-mi and says nir'eh li that a person can be machmir on himself, lefi ha'inyan. But for Sukkah, where the Torah says "teishvu" -- ke'ein taduru, violating ke'ein taduru like sitting in the Sukkah in the rain or freezing cold is not sekhar worthy, it's the act of a hedyot. There seems to be some gray area here. By shirtut, the chumerah has to be justifiable in order to qualify as valuable. By Sukkah in the rain, the requirement be far less -- it had to not violate existing guidelines. And, these two seem linked, as both involve the question of what kind of motive properly justifies a chumerah. If just not running counter to "ke'ein taduru" is enough for a chumerah to be valid, wouldn't acknowledging a rejected shitah be enough too? -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 7 01:49:01 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:49:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? Message-ID: Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. Any thoughts on the asking for a Torah remez and responding with one from Nach? She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 Wed Aug 7 01:51:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 08:51:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life Message-ID: My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky This book is addressed to the "Yaakov's" who have spent their lifetime in full time torah studies and now, going out into "the real world" to make a living, feel they have sold out their learning for a "bowl of lentils". (R'Lopiansky's allusion to Esav selling his birthright). [me-This is the problem statement] R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience the sweetness of every mitzvah. Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. My thoughts. 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice is still generally on target for both of them 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How would they effect the rest of the community? 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu (may we see the consolation of Jerusalem and its rebuilding speedily in our days ), 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 7 04:58:09 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 07:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: Here's the schedule for this coming Shabbos afternoon (i.e., when Tisha B'Av or its observance is Motzaei Shabbos), as it is always announced at my shul: Everyone has Shalosh Seudos at home, finishing by shkia. After tzeis, we say Baruch Hamavdil, remove our shoes, and go back to shul - by car if desired. In shul, we daven Maariv, someone says Boray M'oray Haeish on a candle for the tzibur, and we read Eicha. My question is: Is it preferable to do a united Boray M'oray Ha'esh in shul, or to do it individually at home? The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: being motzi my family, concerns about hearing the chazan well enough, and how much hanaah I'm getting from the light. (On a regular Motzaei Shabbos, there is also the need to smell the besamim.) These reasons will apply on Tisha B'Av as well, right? Granted that the Kos and Besamim are absent, but is there any reason to cut corners on the Ner? I'm curious what other people do. I can't think of any reason not to say it at home after removing my shoes, but maybe others can think of reasons. Thanks. With tefilos that this question might yet become academic even this very year, Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 7 11:13:09 2019 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:13:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin. This is recorded by Dr Fred Rosner and subsequently by R Tatz. Interestingly, neither quote any source for the story. What intrigued me was the year. In Israel in 1948 the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, R SZ Auerbach, R Tz P Frank and a number of other prominent poskim were resident in Israel. Ok, R Shlomo Zalman was only 38 and clearly junior to a number of other at the time. But R Moshe, at 53, I would have thought, was also junior to, for example, the chazon ish. Yet the Chief rabbi of EY decided that the shoulders he wanted to lean on for a situation of immediate life and death were those of R Moshe all the way over in New York, even as early as 1948. Even with transatlantic phone calls as they were then. Does this surprise anyone else or is it just me? The questions it raises are: Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? Was this to do with personal relationships, pure perception of worldwide seniority in psak, an early example of hashkafic tensions, or something else? And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak, when exactly, or on the death of whom, did R Moshe become the highest address for issues of life and death? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 05:57:31 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector Message-ID: <20190808125731.GA14334@aishdas.org> I just hit this in AhS OC 32:88, and thought to tell the purveyor of a "how to wear your tefillin" chart. (CC Avodah.) https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ??. There are those who don't remove the container for the shel yad from their tefillin even while davening, and it is improper to do so. I don't know norms of 100+ years ago, but I /think/ cases in those days didn't include the maavarta, and he is referring to a 7 sided paper box (no bottom) worn atop the bayis itself. Much like inserts we have now -- but without a hole for kissing / mishmush of the shel yad during Shema. But is that a "tiq"? What kind of case or bag would people have been leaving on when wearing their tefillin? (And didn't get removed back when they unwound the retzu'ah?!) So, does the AhS we shouldn't be wearing those inserts to protect the shel yad, or not? OTOH, "vehaya lakhem le'os" is used to permit putting your sleeve atop the shel yad. Mah beinaihu? I clearly don't understand the AhS correctly. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Aug 8 07:50:08 2019 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: From https://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5228 Contemporary Consensus This 'Shower Exclusion' during the Nine Days for hygienic purposes is ruled decisively by the vast majority of contemporary authorities including Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt"l, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky zt"l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l, the Klausenberger Rebbe zt"l, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner zt"l, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt"l, Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt"l, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu zt"l, Rav Yisrael Halevi Belsky zt"l, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt"l, the Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halachah, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch.[16] Conversely, and although there are differing reports of his true opinion, it must be noted that the Chazon Ishzt"l, the Steipler Gaon zt"l, as well as Rav Binyamin Zilber zt"l and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, are quoted as being very stringent with any showering during the Nine Days, even for hygienic reasons, and even while acknowledging that most other Rabbanim were mattir in specific circumstances.[17] Additionally, and quite importantly, this 'Shower Exclusion' is by no means a blanket hetter. There are several stipulations many of these poskim cite, meant to ensure that the shower will be strictly for cleanliness, minimizing enjoyment and mitigating turning it into 'pleasure bathing': 1. There has to be a real need: i.e. to remove excessive sweat, perspiration, grime, or dirt. (In other words, 'to actually get clean!'). 2. One should take a quick shower in water as cold as one can tolerate (preferably cold and not even lukewarm). 3. It is preferable to wash one limb at a time and not the whole body at once. (This is where an extendable shower head comes in handy). If only one area is dirty, one should only wash that area of the body. 4. One shouldn't use soap or shampoo unless necessary, meaning if a quick rinse in water will do the job, there's no reason to go for overkill. Obviously, if one needs soap or shampoo to get clean he may use it. From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 11:31:06 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Contemporary Consensus --------------------- See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu, 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 8 12:50:08 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:31:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days I heard RYBS explained it two ways. And barring an intended Brisker chaqira in the subtle difference, I would assume they're simply different phrasings: 1- If you shower everyday, then it isn't that showering is a luxury unbefitting aveilus. And there is precedent for this among early pesaqim, eg the AhS, allowing showering before Shabbos by those who shower before every Shabbos. 2- Someone who showers everyday may shower during the 9 Days because he is an istinis. RYBS's position about the 9 days paralleling sheloshim appears to be his own chiddush, and part of the whole "halachic man" mindset, his approach to minhagim, to "ceremony" in halakhah, or this story found in "Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice I" (Tradition, 32:2, p. 41 by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer): [T]he following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970's, one of R. Kelemer's woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik -- who lived in Brookline -- on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of "religious high" was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. In a talk (in Yiddish) to the YU Rabbinic Alumni in May 1955 (see The Rav, The World of R Joseph B Soloveitchik vol II pg 54), he gave his opinion of kiruv based on "ceremony": ... 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... A year later, when speaking to the RCA, the Rav returns to the "white tablecloth" when discussing R' Samson Raphael Hirsch's emphasis on "ceremony" and how that is one of the ways the Hirschian approach differs from YU's. See Insights of Rabbi Joseph B Soloveitchik, pg 162.) The Rav's negative attitude toward finding meaning in an shawl without tzitzis is akin to his devaluing the aesthetics and peace of mind many people get from a beautiful Shabbos table. This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member. And therefore rules that only the ruiles of the 12 month period of aveilus apply to the Tammuz portion of the Three Weeks, whereas the 9 Days have the practices of sheloshim. The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". Even within the community of the Rav's students, efforts to have more "ceremony" in our lives are increasingly common. Whether Carlebach minyanim Friday night or on Rosh Chodsh (the YU of today hosts both) or study of Chassidic works like Nesivos Shalom or the works of the Piacezna. (Halevai there were more opportunities to find and experience Litvisher spirituality, ie Mussar, but that's a different topic.) The Rav's attitude comes straight from Brisker ideal as expressed in Halakhic Man, that halakhah is the sole bridge between our creative selves and our thirst to relate to G-d. But I believe that as the world transitions from Modernism to Post-Modernism, it speaks to fewer and fewer of those of us who live in that world -- even fewer of us that are resisting that world's excesses. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 8 14:03:24 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:03:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8/8/19 2:31 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > See page 198 of nefesh harav where r'ybs quoties r'ms that the minhag > not to shower during the 9 days was taken from not showering during > shloshim. Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason > not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 8 14:33:53 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:33:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason not to shower during the 9 days But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? -- Puk chazi apparently. My guess would be changing cultural standards Which always leads me back to the question of how and when they?re reflected. I think it?s not a simple algorithm. On a similar note if we understand that washing clothes is not allowed because of the hesech hadaat issue, it would seem that should have changed with the common use of automatic washing machines. 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 Aug 9 07:58:30 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:05:51PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote: > R' Micha Berger quoted the Aruch Hashulchan: > At the end of the se'if, in kesav Rashi parenthesis, RYME writes: >> [Yeish she'ein mesirin hatiq shel yad meihatefilin gam be'eis tefillah, >> ve'ein nakhon la'asos kein.] > Double negatives drive me crazy!!! But in Tanakh and Rabbinic Hebrew they are common. I think the problem you have is more caused by the imprecision of "kein". It could refer to "yeish shei'ein mesirin..." or "mesirin hatiq". The comment is in a parenthetic code to a se'if about how tzipui with gold or the leather of a non-kosher species would invalidate one's tefillin. https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim.32.88 IOW, the discussion is motive to UNcover tefillin. I understood RYME as saying it is improper to leave the paper boxes -- or today's plastic one -- on, but not a pesul like if it were a more permanent tzipui. I never heard of people being maqpid to remove the cover of the shel yad, so I shared with RGD and the tzibbur to see if anyone had. Or if I misunderstood what kind of tiq he's talking about. -Micha -- Micha Berger Zion will be redeemed through justice, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and her returnees, through righteousness. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:46:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> ?Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? How would one even begin to go about finding out what people do during shloshim, and why. And surely it varies from community to community, so how can one say what "people" do without specifying which people? As a datum: When I asked a L rov about showering during shloshim, he wouldn't give a direct answer, but instead asked "What do you do during the 9 days?" And when I replied that I do shower then, he said "Whatever heter you use during the nine days will be just as valid now". But he avoided paskening on *either* case. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Sun Aug 11 16:40:23 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Not wearing tefillin shel yad protector In-Reply-To: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> References: <1565366752447.7269dffd5399f1e1@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5b457aac-5f63-7380-f355-c40444a0c47b@sero.name> See _Ashkavta Derebbi_, by Rabbi MD Rivkin, pages 35 and 38-39 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=57 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=60 http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3404&pgnum=61 On covering the shel yad with the sleeve, see pages 32 and 35-38 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 01:26:29 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: References: <6C3CE571-65EF-4E56-90A8-6D0A6BE0257A@sibson.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/19 5:33 pm, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >>> Since people now shower during shloshim there's no reason >>> not to shower during the 9 days >> But what is the makor for "people now shower during shloshim"? > Puk chazi apparently. But is it? Has anyone done any kind of survey? =========================================== I've often pointed out that halachists seem to have a feel for this (nice way of saying they don't embrace survey methodologies) 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Mon Aug 12 01:39:40 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 20:52, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't > be a minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established > structure for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:58:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190812175837.GB9286@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach > amina? I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses the first two. Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved. The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush: Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out) Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes "hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a chiddush. That's at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=35000 But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point. Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh at https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=14026 (qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina). Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah. That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary possibility is the gemara's pesaq! He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that: - i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue - salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential misunderstanding of the statement. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering. Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949) - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From toramada at bezeqint.net Mon Aug 12 13:47:50 2019 From: toramada at bezeqint.net (Shoshana Boublil) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David HaLevy. Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:50:08 -0400 From: Micha Berger ... > This idea that in true Judaism, meaning is only found in halakhah goes as > far as to shape the Rav's rulings about how to practice mourning during > these three weeks. The Rav was certain that Chazal and the rishonim could > not possibly have established practices for the Three Weeks that did not > follow the forms of aveilus for the death of a family member... > The point in common is that to the Rav's worldview, there couldn't be a > minhag of mourning that didn't have the halachically established structure > for aveilus. Such a practice would be "ceremony". ... In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in Machashava. The result was a series of books where every single halachic topic has an introduction discussing related matters of Machshava, that at times also include the issues of feelings and ceremony and much, much more. His introduction to lighting candles which talks about the meaning of increasing the light in the house, both in physical and spiritual ways is enlightening. Many other examples are available and I highly recommend the series (and his shu"t). We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah in the world through increased knowledge of halachah. Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Aug 12 15:00:32 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:00:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> 1. R. Yosef Adler has said numerous times both publicly (as recently as 2 weeks ago) and privately ((to congregants sitting shiva) that the Rav permitted showering during the 9 days and shiva because today everyone is considered an istinis. 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is difficult to accept. Because of this as well as some halachic questions about the story, I find it difficult to accept its accuracy. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Mon Aug 12 15:04:17 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 22:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org>, <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> Message-ID: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> > I was reading R' Micha's comments on RYBS's view of halacha and ceremony > and was struck by the worldview that is so different from the viewpoint > discussed in the introduction to the Makor Chaim by Rav Chaim David > HaLevy. > > > > In the introduction to the Makor Chaim (IIRC), Rav Chaim David HaLevy > mentions his reasons for writing this halachic set of books. He mentions > a discussion with Rav AYH Kook and how Rav Kook told him that the modern > Jew needs not just Halacha but also Machshava. Therefore, in order to > increase knowledge of Halachah it is imperitive to mix in > > We have here two Gedolim who were contemporaries, and who came from > different backgrounds and worldviews and both acted to increase Torah > in the world through increased knowledge /::::::::::: Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps stem from 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 JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 13 01:45:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. I note 2 things. First, it was printed after the Rav died and he never told the story publicly in his lifetime nor did he have a chance to confirm, deny, or explain it after it became public. I searched to see if (a) the story was ever told in his lifetime or (b) if there?s any source other than the one in the Frimers? article but I was unable to find any. ================================ I dislike the story but I'd suggest contacting R' Kelemer: But first, the story as told by Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer (?Women?s Prayer Services ? Theory and Practice I? in Tradition, 32:2 Winter 1998, p. 41): R. Soloveitchik believed he had good reason to doubt that greater fulfillment of mitsvot motivated many of these women, as illustrated in the following story, related to us by R. Yehuda Kelemer, former Rabbi of the Young Israel of Brookline, Massachusetts. During the mid-1970?s, one of R. Kelemer?s woman congregants at the Young Israel of Brookline was interested in wearing a tallit and tsitsit during the prayer services. After R. Kelemer had expressed to her his hesitations about the matter, she approached R. Soloveitchik ? who lived in Brookline ? on the matter. The Rav explained that in light of the novelty of the action, it needed to be adopted gradually. Accordingly, he suggested that she first try wearing a tallit without tsitsit (which is, of course, allowed for women.) The Rav asked the woman to return to him after three months, at which time they would discuss the matter further. When the two met once again, she described to R. Soloveitchik the magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit. The Rav pointed out to the woman that wearing a tallit without tsitsit lacked any halakhically authentic element of mitsvah. It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of ?religious high? was not an enhanced kiyyum hamitsvah, but something else. Under such circumstances, the Rav maintained, wearing a tallit was an inappropriate use of the mitsvah. Consequently, the Rav forbade the woman from wearing a tallit with tsitsit. 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 arie.folger at gmail.com Tue Aug 13 06:09:52 2019 From: arie.folger at gmail.com (Arie Folger) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:09:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days Message-ID: R'Alan Engel asked: > So where, in the Rav's structure, does the minhag of refraining from meat > and wine in the Nine Days fit in, considering that it appears only in > aveilus for an onein, and not in shiva, sheloshim etc? Furthermore, some > specifically recommend drinking wine during the shiva. I heard besheim Rav Hershel Schachter that the Rov held it based on Bava Batra 60b, and that though Rabbi Yehoshua rejected the total abstention from meat and wine, we still do it for a few days a year. Our Rabbis taught: When the Temple was destroyed for the second time, large numbers in Israel became ascetics, binding themselves neither to eat meat nor to drink wine. R. Joshua got into conversation with them and said to them: My sons, why do you not eat meat nor drink wine? They replied: Shall we eat flesh which used to be brought as an offering on the altar, now that this altar is in abeyance? Shall we drink wine which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, but now no longer? He said to them: If that is so, we should not eat bread either, because the meal offerings have ceased. They said: [That is so, and] we can manage with fruit. We should not eat fruit either, [he said,] because there is no longer an offering of firstfruits. Then we can manage with other fruits [they said]. But, [he said,] we should not drink water, because there is no longer any ceremony of the pouring of water. To this they could find no answer, so he said to them: My sons, come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible, because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose on the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure, ... It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it. Shenizkeh lirot benechamat Tzion, -- Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 07:39:30 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? Message-ID: Thought experiments: There's a mitzvah that's equally incumbent on a group that you are part of: 1) do you "chop" (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - does it change your calculus? 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 Wed Aug 14 07:47:38 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:47:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a > group that you are part of: > 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it > is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:36:01 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163601.GD24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... It may have been at least partly because someone whose qehillah was in the US was somewhat less exposed to accusations of bias. Or, for that matter, less impacted by actual unconscious bias. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:20:10 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814162010.GB24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 02:39:30PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2) What if you are looked at as the senior member of the group - > does it change your calculus? If the mitzvah requires convincing people it is even mutar, yes. For example, the Taz (OC 328:5) says that if ch"v one needs to "violate" (?) Shabbos for the sake of a choleh sheyeish bo saqanah, and the rav is present, he should do it. Quoting Yuma 84b (which is also quoted in the Yad Shabbos 2:3): These things are not done not through an aku"n, not through a qatan, ela al yedei gedolei Yisrael and you do not say let these things be done by women or Kusim. There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to. (The difference between aku"m and Kusim, as in this gemara, is worth its own conversation.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but to become a tzaddik. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 14 09:33:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:33:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 07:58:09AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The whole rest of the year, a full Havdala is done in shul, but most people > are not yotzay with it, preferring to say it themselves at home. I can't > speak for anyone else, but my reasons for saying Havdala at home include: > being motzi my family... Why is it so rare for women to make havdalah for themselves? (Do you know a reason that doesn't involve the word "mustache"?) And whatever that reason is, does it apply to saying borei me'orei ha'eish on Tish'ah beAv? Because I think the implications of existing minhag is that the men do borei me'orei ha'eish with berov am, and their families light an avuqah candle and make the berakhos themselves at home. Lemaaseh, I made borei me'orei ha'eish at home between getting my qinos and crocs and leaving for shul. But only because you posted something that made me think about it. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call http://www.aishdas.org/asp life which is required to be exchanged for it, Author: Widen Your Tent immediately or in the long run. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 11:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah? In-Reply-To: <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> References: , <143d884f-2775-986b-c8a2-5596ea5510c1@sero.name> Message-ID: > >> On 14/8/19 10:39 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Thought experiments: There?s a mitzvah that?s equally incumbent on a >> group that you are part of: >> 1) do you ?chop? (grab) the mitzvah (perhaps show how important/dear it >> is) or let someone else do it (perhaps showing humility)? > > If there's a rush of others to do it, then "Hatzenuim moshchim es > yedeihem." If nobody is stepping forward then "Bemakom she'ein anashim". > > > > -- > so what about the case where a minyan is forming up at a minyan factory and there is no sap gabbai? Do u chap being Shatz at the appointed hour Kt Joel richTHIS 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 jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Aug 14 11:48:21 2019 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:48:21 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah Message-ID: ?There is a famous in YU circles story where RYBS, back when he was Berel, got sick, and R' Chaim told R Moshe to turn on the light so that the doctor could see better. R Moshe hesitated, and RCB called him an apiqoreis for doing so. With the explanaiton that the question wasn't about being meiqil in Shabbs, but about being machmir in piquach nefesh. They ask why RCB didn't do it himself; but bekhol zos, no one expected the doctor to.? The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. And while we?ll never know what really happened, I prefer my version. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 12:26:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> > The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he was not called an apikores. Iirc it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. 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 allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Aug 14 13:05:21 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 21:05:21 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course), and then do borei me'orei ho'eish after nacht. What is the advantage of waiting till Sunday night? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Aug 14 16:10:36 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chop a Mitzvah In-Reply-To: <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> References: , <4B20264E-2311-4804-B1B9-EF7BF465430E@sibson.com> Message-ID: > On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The way I heard the story in YU many decades ago, it was, in fact, >> RCB who turned on the light, and there was a lesson to Rav Moshe but he >> was not called an apikores. > IIRC it was the Dayan of brisk (r Simcha Zelig) who rcb directed > to turn on the light after r ms hesitated. I always assumed that and > addition to just perhaps being closer to the light the lesson was that > this really was Halacha lmaaseh as certified by the Dayan. Confirming my version of the story see page 27 of Nefesh Harav Kt Joel rich From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 03:20:56 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:20:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering during the 9 Days Message-ID: . >From R' Joseph Kaplan: > 2. R? Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer?s? article about > the Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit. ... > ... > Second, I was not a talmid of the Rav but I did discuss the story > with several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well. A > number told me that while the Rav would, of course, not see any > value in wearing a tallit without tzitzit, the fact that he would > put a women from his Boston community through such a test rather > than handle it in a much more gentle and sensitive manner (can you > imagine how she felt at the end if the story is accurate) is > difficult to accept... People are entitled to their feelings, and if "several people who were his talmidim or who knew him well" feel that way about this story, I cannot argue with that fact. I simply want to add *my* feeling, which is that the Rav DID handle it in a very gentle and sensitive manner. In fact, every time I've read the story, I've been impressed with this approach, the mark of a master educator. The woman approached him, and he suggested a practical experiment. Based on the woman's own report of the experiment's results, he was able to offer his own interpretation of those results. Though not explicit in the published story, I would imagine that the Rav allowed her to continue wearing the tzitzis-less tallis if she had wanted to, thus continuing the "magnificent nature of her religious experience in wearing the tallit". He simply forbade her from adding tzitzis to that tallis. We don't know her reaction to that final step. But even if her reaction was negative, I can't imagine how the Rav could have handled this more gently than he did. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 15 15:10:46 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:10:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:05:21PM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood why, when Tisha B'av is after Shabbos, we don't > make havdala on wine after the seuda (before shkia), which is permissible > every shabbos after plag hamincha (without that candle, of course)... Permissable, but undesirable. The SA (OC 293:3) writes: Someone who is anoos, such as if he has to enter the dark at the techum for a devar mitzvah... ("Enter the dark" was my attempt to render "lehachshikh".) Arguably 9 beAv is equally lidvar mitzvah. But still, this doesn't sound like it is definitely the better solution, and I am guessing the minhag is what it is because it is indeed better to wait. Another thing is that I see the AS places havdalah after maariv in that situation (continuing from where I left off): he can daven for motza"sh from pelag haminchah onward and make havdalah immediately -- but he shouldn't make the berakhah on the candle. And similarly he is prohibited from doing melakhah until tzeis hakokhavim. And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. But that assumes the order is davqa Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Strength does not come from winning. Your http://www.aishdas.org/asp struggles develop your strength When you go Author: Widen Your Tent through hardship and decide not to surrender, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF that is strength. - Arnold Schwarzenegger From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 15 21:17:27 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:17:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would apply to tisha b'av -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 15 19:18:06 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:18:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I had a question over Shabbos. When I researched it later, I found that I had this same question 19 years ago, and I asked it in this very forum. At http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#14 R' Joel Rich offered an answer according to "The yesh mfarshim in tosfot", but I have not yet heard an answer which would follow Rashi. In hopes that perhaps someone can answer, I'll ask it again: Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: "They did it in the 40th year, and the next day, everyone got up alive. When they saw that, they were amazed, and they said, 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month.' So they lay down in their graves on the nights until the night of 15 Av. When they saw that the moon was full on the 15th, and not one of them had died, they realized that the calculation of the month had been correct, and that the 40 years of the gezera were already complete. That generation established that day as a Yom Tov." Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or something similar. And yet, it seems (according to Rashi) that the entire People did in fact go back into their graves for several more nights. I have not heard that Moshe Rabenu or anyone else objected to this, and I'm trying to figure out why. I did come up with one possible solution. I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? Or do you have a different explanation? Thanks! Akiva Miller POSTSCRIPT: Some might want to respond that the story as told by Rashi is only a mashal of some sort, and not intended as a historical record. This was answered by R' Micha Berger on this thread at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n015.shtml#12 where he wrote: <<< mishalim need to be halachically sound. ... the medrash wouldn't have coined a mashal that is kineged halachah. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 16 07:39:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:39:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190816143905.GE16294@aishdas.org> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:17:27AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; as > soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the chametz, ... On the front end, though, Pesach is a poor example because issur chameitz doesn't start at nightfall. Closer to our case: If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward. :-)BBii! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 17:31:23 2019 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 01:31:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 08:43, Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared. Even if the "wrong" day was declared to be Rosh Chodesh Av in > that particular year, there is absolutely no need to worry that any day > other than the ninth was the "real" Tisha B'av. I imagine that anyone who > *would* have had such feelings would have been guilty of apikorsus or > something similar. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Aug 17 20:11:50 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > What compels you to believe that every derasha (in this case Atem > afilu shogegin etc) was already known in the desert? Or, in fact, > to any generation prior to the derasha being expounded? > > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof > mishna' - presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows > for changes in halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. I had not thought of that, probably because I'm so very used to the opposite, that Moshe Rabenu knew everything. A good example of what I am used to would be "Moavi v'lo Moaviah", which (as explained to me) was NOT a new drasha of Boaz's, but was simply a little-known halacha that had been kept hidden until Boaz publicized it. New drashos were indeed propounded now and then, but I'm used to a presentation similar to that of Ben Zoma in the Haggada, where a specific person is credited with darshening the drasha. I don't see such accreditation in this case, so I'm a bit hesitant to accept this as an answer to my problem. RAE may be correct, but I'd like to see more evidence for it. For those who want to learn more about the drasha that RAE is referring to, it is on Rosh Hashana 25a, and is cited by the Torah Temimah Vayikra 23:4, #18 and #19. I had posted: > I noticed that Rashi never used the phrase "Kiddush Hachodesh". > Rather, he used the phrase "cheshbon [ha]chodesh", and (perhaps > significantly) he used it *twice*. Is it possible that the Beis > Din did not declare any particular day to be Rosh Chodesh of that > month? I have always thought that the Beis Din declared every > single month, from Nisan 2448 until some time after Churban Bayis > Sheni, and this would obviously include the time in the Midbar. > But if this did not actually happen, and rather each individual > "calculated" the month on their own, then Rashi could make sense. > > Any thoughts? Did we do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar? I spent much of Shabbos discussing this with several friends, and I now thank them for their input, which helped greatly with the rest of this post -- Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view. This shows me that we DID do Kiddush Hachodesh in the Midbar, and it also provides a simple answer to why Rashi used the word "cheshbon". A friend raised a question: If the moon could not be seen, how could they have seen the full moon on the night of 15 Av? Someone else answered that the Ananei Hakavod left when Aharon Hakohen passed away, and someone else pointed out that he died on Rosh Chodesh Av of that same year -- nine days before the Tisha B'av in question. (This sudden visibility of the moon after 40 years in which no one saw it, is a great answer to the first question I posed in this thread, in Avodah 6:13. Namely: To most of us modern city folk, the night sky is a mystery. But 3300 years ago, even children could probably have seen the difference between a 9-day-old moon and an older one; they certainly could have figured it out by the 13th or 14th, and should not have needed to see the entire circle on the 15th. But now I understand. Many of those people had never seen the moon before in their lives, and for the rest, it had been 40 years ago. They were less familiar with the night sky than we are! So, yes, I can easily believe that their safek lasted all the way to the full moon.) The sequence of events seems to be: The molad of Av occurred while the clouds were still obscuring the moon, so the Beis Din were mekadesh it based on their calculations. Then, on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. The moon was probably visible (depending on local weather) on the night of Tisha B'Av, but that doesn't really matter, because people were unfamiliar with what a nine-day-old moon should look like. All they had to go on was that fact that Rosh Chodesh was declared based on mathematical calculations rather than physical evidence. So the next morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, when even people who were unfamiliar with the moon's appearance were able to figure out what happened. All of this is neat and reasonable, except the part about how Kiddush Hachodesh is valid even in the case of an error. I'm tentatively accepting RAE's suggestion, and if anyone else has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Sun Aug 18 23:48:38 2019 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: <20190814163300.GC24283@aishdas.org> <20190815221046.GA12484@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5D5A4646.1090405@biu.ac.il> regarding making havdalah on shabbos and thus being able to drink the wine. the Rosh (Taanit ch. 4) raises the suggestion and says that once a person makes havdalah they have accepted the fast. The Magen Avraham (OC 556) also mentions this. Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > On 15/8/19 6:10 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > >> And after maariv... I am guessing that would qualify as tosefes 9 beAv. > > > Is there such a thing? I don't think so. There's no toesefes Pesach; > as soon as the stars are out on motzaei pesach one can break out the > chametz, even if one is still assur bimlacha. I assume the same would > apply to tisha b'av > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 19 08:35:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:35:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Incarceration in Mesorah Message-ID: <20190819153541.GA29860@aishdas.org> Much has been made of the fact that halakhah doesn't mandate incarceration as a punishment. R' Avi Shafran did just a couple of days ago, so I was finally motivated to pull out sources. Honestly, though, to me it just seemed obvious. We know they had kippot, that these are used as jails for holding people before trial, and as a means of back-handed execution of murders and a subset of repeat offenders where halakhah had no solution in terms of mandatory oneshim. So how likely was it that they just released the criminal in the majority of cases involving someone you can't let lose in society but had no onesh -- or a ganef with a long record who didn't have to sell themveles into avdus? We have little question that halakhah neither requires of prohibits it. So the question would be whether beis din did indeed commonly use prison as punishment. Thus my "in mesorah" rather than "in halakhah" in the subject line. Yad, Hilkhos Rozeiach 2:5. The context is set up in halakhah 4, we're talking about a murderer who wasn't subject to onesh, and whom the king didn't punish, and at a time when BD didn't need to reinforce observance in the general community. Halakhah 5 says they are to be lashed to near death and then le'ASRAM BEMASOR UVMATZOQ SHANIM RABOS (emphasis mine, of course). Also, see Bamidbar 11:28 and Rashi's davar acheir ad loc. Eldad and Meidad are speaking nevu'ah in the encampment, and Yehoshua says to Moshe, "Kela'eim." Rashi's first shitah is that the word is the same as "kileim" (without the alef) -- "finish them!" Davar acheir the shoresh is kela (kaf-lamed-alef) -- "imprison them!" The Bartenura ad loc favors the latter peshat, and says the superfluous alef was why Rashi was looking for something better. The davar acheir implies that they had a prison (or at least a jail) in the midbar. And the very existence of the possibility implies that Rashi was comfortable with the idea of imprisonment as a punishment. It wasn't some newfangled idea that the Torah has an ideological or tactical problem with. The Ramban ad loc also talks about a beis hakela, like one would lock up a crazy person. Exactly what I took for granted -- prison as a means of protecting potential victims. (Especially given the Rambam.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns http://www.aishdas.org/asp G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four Author: Widen Your Tent corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF to include himself. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:08:26 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? 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 Tue Aug 20 14:11:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] A Poseik's poseik? Message-ID: A prominent MO pulpit Rabbi was talking about psak and going to more than one poseik . He stated that going to more than one is not a problem as long as they have similar approaches. In particular he mentioned Rabbi H Schachter, Rabbi M Willig and Rabbi Asher Weiss. I was a bit surprised because I don't believe that their psak approaches are particularly similar I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). I would think this would be especially true when the methodologies of psak of the poskim are much different. It's certainly been my impression that Rabbi Weiss's approach is much different in than Rabbi Schachter (e.g. he doesn't generally hold from tzvei dinim , Is a lot more likely to go with libi omer li. Etc.) Nothing wrong with any of these approaches they just seem to be very different and while even poskim with very similar approaches may come to different conclusions it just seems to me that the same way one would settle on a general life approach in a poseik one might think to strive for consistency in psak approach. I guess the original statement would be more in line with what I call "the franchise" theory (adapted from my consulting life) - Once you earn the trust of your peers (and more so your clients) you get to do a lot of what you want based on the past history/trust rather than on the individual analysis. Of course none of my musings are lmaaseh 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 Tue Aug 20 14:40:20 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Torah remez ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820214020.GA7765@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:49:01AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Moed Katan 5a - "Amar R'Shimon ben Pazi," Remez l'tzion kvarot min > hatorah, Talmud Lomar" and then responds with a quote from Yechezkel. It would be the only such example in shas as far as I could find. I would therefore assume that's exactly that Rabina is talking to R Ashi about. And so the answe to the question doesn't finally come until "gemara gemiri lah, ve'asa Yechezqeil... R' Avohu amar: "vetamei tamei yiqra'..." SO I would read the gemara as following up wiht exactly your question, and then eventually getting to either: - TSBP until Yechezqeil, or - Vayiqra 13:48 Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are great, and our foibles are great, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and therefore our troubles are great -- Author: Widen Your Tent but our consolations will also be great. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi AY Kook From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 20 14:58:42 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> References: , <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, > something that worked three times was considered effective ://::::::::://////: So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 20 14:25:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:08:26PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Clarke's first law states that any sufficiently advanced technology > is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did Chazal accept any > medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources (since no one knew how > these treatments actually worked [and in the end they didn't])? Lehefekh... Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, something that worked three times was considered effective. And anything effective is exempt from derekh Emori. (Also, from muqtza.) See Shabbos 67a, starting at the mishnah. For that matter, Abayei and Rava seem to exempt anything fone for refu'ah, even without a chazah that it works. Kemie'os, objects and lekhchishah are included in the discussion. So long as it's not real AZ. Top of amud beis, R Yehudah's ban on using the idioms "gad gaddi" and "danu danei". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. http://www.aishdas.org/asp If you want time, you must make it. Author: Widen Your Tent - Charles Buxton - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Aug 20 19:50:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:50:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . I wrote: <<< The sequence of events seems to be: ... on Rosh Chodesh, Aharon died and the clouds left. ... [On Tisha B'Av] morning they figured the calculations must have been in error. Ditto for several more days, until Tu b'Av, ... >>> If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Aug 21 07:25:15 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:25:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190821142515.GH17849@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:50:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that > the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the > Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but I > thought that the mix of simcha and mourning was interesting. Well, they couldn't not be happy. Knowing you're not going to die is going to be like that. Even for a generation raised on mon and living in G-d-provided sukkos. But perhaps this advocates for a mixed read of the reasons for 15 beAv. That 15 beAv didn't become a special day ledoros (or at least for as long as Megillas Taanis, and revived pretty recently) over any one of the events Chazal give, but when it was realized how many positive events happened on the same day. In which case, there was no minor holiday of Tu beAv that year yet. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger One who kills his inclination is as though he http://www.aishdas.org/asp brought an offering. But to bring an offering, Author: Widen Your Tent you must know where to slaughter and what - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF parts to offer. - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:03:51 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:03:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brisk Halachic Process (was: Showering During the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190822140351.GA5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Iiuc the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha. R Rosensweig from RIETS usually > gives an introduction to each tractate that he teaches at outlining the > underlying philosophical underpinnings that carry through or perhaps > stem from Halacha In my most recent blog post, I discuss the difference between Brisk and Telz on how halakhah related to hashkafah. My usual quick example (the one I used in Widen Your Tent): To R' Chaim, the laws of baalus define the concept of property. As RJR attributed to RYBS, above. To R' Shimon (begining chapters of Shaarei Yosher sha'ar 5), property is a natural concept which halakhah then mediates. The other issue I raised was whether pesaq is a fact finding mission or a legal interpretation one. I attributed the former position to Brisk, which is why they have Brisker chumeros and cheshash for the latter. >From those bases, I went through how RHS and I ended up with such different ways of tying tzitzis. 1- I take aggadita into account when choosing among shitos that have no resolving pesaq. As precedent, I use the AhS's account of Rashi vs Rabbeinu Tam tefillin in the period of the rishonim, when both were worn, vs after the publication of the Zohar, which endorsed Rashi's shitah on aggadic grounds. 2- To RHS, both the dinim for lavan and for tekheiles are equailly real, even if we don't have pesaqim for tekheiles. For R Shimon or the AhS (or nearly any acharon or poseiq I could think of who wasn't influenced by Brisk), the dinim for lavan are more real, and one ought not be machmir in tekheiles at the expense of the accepted pesaqim in lavan. If you still want to read the post, it's currently named "Bottom to Top" . I was thinking of the bottom line practice of tzitzis vs the top-layer halachic meta-meta-issues. But the post ought be renamed, and likely will be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where http://www.aishdas.org/asp you are, or what you are doing, that makes you Author: Widen Your Tent happy or unhappy. It's what you think about. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Dale Carnegie From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 07:09:21 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Woman and Tallis story verified (was: Showering during the 9 Days) In-Reply-To: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> References: <7533E6FD-AE40-4E1B-AB8A-7D935D4C5FDD@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20190822140921.GB5741@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:00:32PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > 2. R' Micha repeats the story told in the Frimer's' article about the > Rav and the woman who wanted to wear a tallit.... So, I confirmed with the LOR the Frimers' cite. 1- The story did happen. 2- He didn't want the story retold, and tried to stop Rs Frimer from using it. Which explains why the story didn't get out until their article. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water, http://www.aishdas.org/asp eventually it will rise to the top. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From driceman at optimum.net Thu Aug 22 08:47:41 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:47:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 12:03:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:03:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:47:41AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's > psak entails the same problem. The SA says in his haqdamah that he ruled according to the majority of his triumverate -- the Rif, Rambam and Rosh. (Which stacks the deck since the baalei Tosados make up the majority of rishonim, but their sole voice is via the Rosh, and even then the Rosh can be outnunbered 2 to 1.) And kayadua, there are numerous exceptions to that rule. And the mechaber doesn't even feel a need to justify not following the majority. I suggested that perhaps this is just it: the majority in one machloqes forces a particular pesaq in what the SA felt was a related halakhah. To avoid such cases of tarta desasrei. But that's all fanciful. It would explain the data, but we have no indication at all -- it would mean the SA saw a lot of non-obvious correlations. But maybe one of you could find something I didn't. However, that segues into a potential answer to your question: Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the pesaqim are tightly correlated? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and http://www.aishdas.org/asp this was a great wonder. But it is much more Author: Widen Your Tent wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From JRich at sibson.com Thu Aug 22 13:05:50 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Tartei_d=E2=80=99Satrei?= In-Reply-To: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> References: , <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> Message-ID: <7C74D53A-353D-400E-B587-54990A0DA1B7@sibson.com> > RJR: > > >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. > > David Riceman > _______________________________________________ > My case was where the ?lower level? poseik did not act as a first level wine by reprocessing the particular question from scratch. So the question to me is different from any individual following the Sanhedrin where is totally allowed and perhaps required to rely on them without question. In my case if the poseik Were to follow one in authority I would have no problem with it. It?s where he chooses to use multiple authorities in place of reprocessing that my question starts. It?s a similar question to one I?ve always had about the articulating methodology of the s?a Kt Joel richTHIS 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:38:13 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:38:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ben Torah for Life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190822213813.GA1869@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:51:57AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My thoughts on Ben Torah for Life" by Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky ... > R'Lopiansky's response is multifaceted. On the philosophical side he > states that Yaakov must realize that while extended full time learning was > the right thing to do and forms his core, "the vocation that hashgacha > has allotted you" now is not less valuable if viewed correctly. He is > an agent of HKB"H and must maintain an appropriate (for self and family) > standard of living which reflects his ultimate goals. Keneged kulam isn't kulam. Even if Pei'ah 1:1 means keneged the other 612, that would mean 50% of our job is learning. (But that's not mashmah from the mishnah -- kulam would be the other mitzvos listed there.) And we know why -- because talmud meivi liydei maaseh. It isn't that learening has the greatest inherent valut; its valus is derived from its making you do the other mitzvos. So, learning without the other 50% isn't 50% either. And then, I can't let this go without mentioning R' Shimon Shkop on BALM vs BALC in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. 1- Qedushah is commitment to vehalakhta bidrakhav. "Qedoshim tihyu ki Qadosh Ani". Being qadosh is being consecrative to being meitiv others, bedemus haBorei, kevayakhol. Then he explains that rest and enjoyment can be qadosh, if one is refreshing oneself as part of being better able to be meitiv others. And then finally, "gam zu al kol mif'alav uma'asev shel ha'adam bam beino levein haMaqom" -- mitzvos bein Adam laMaqom are altogether the means of caring for the goose; the goldent eggs are leheitiv im hazulas. (As per his opening words.) That was taken from the first paragraph in the original print of SY. See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf for the original with translation, ch. 1 of my sefer. 2- Later, in par. 2 (pg 55), R Shimon describes how the measure of a person's soul is the size of his "ani". A coarse person only thinks of their body when they say "ani". (In my book, I call that "level 0 of human development; as it's mamash llike an animal." One step up (level 1) is someone who identifies with body and soul. Then there is the person who identifies with their husband or wife and children, or other immediate family (2.0). Then more of their extended family, more of their friends (2.1, 2.2....) until they identify their "ani" as the Jewish People or the entirety of the beri'ah. Notice how lowly he would describe the soul that learns and learns but not to be better to other people, or to teach. How far that is from usual understandings of R' Chaim Voloshiner's "Torah liShmah"! > > He must realize that the outside world is not black (it's all foolishness) > or white (they're great). Our ethical/moral standards are key as Yaakov > maintains his separation and sanctifies HKB "H's name. He needs to look > for/ form a strong. Shul, Community, Rabbi, Chevra and family while he > sets aside time for more practical, focused, inspirational and engaged > learning. He must set aside time to set/correct course and experience > the sweetness of every mitzvah. > > Yaakov must make tfila, Shabbat and Yom Tov different and meaningful. He > must avoid spiritual pitfalls and use down time appropriately. > > > > My thoughts. > > 1) While Yaakov's problem statement (and problem) is very different from > Jack's (my creation - his modern orthodox cousin whose problems stem > from being reared to believe professional success is key), the advice > is still generally on target for both of them > > 2) R'A Feldman's (Rosh Yeshiva-Ner Yisrael) approbation includes the > following statements worth discussing: " It is a fact of our Yeshiva > educational system that a good proportion of our students do not end > up in Torah-related careers and therefore find themselves thrust, often > unprepared, into an environment whose values and behaviors are radically > different from their accustomed ones. Surprisingly, this problem has > never been addressed by our Roshey Yeshiva." > > 3) Also worth discussing - does the response to Yaakov fully address his > problem statement's root cause? If not, why? What other short and long > term responses might be more effective for Yaakov or his children? How > would they effect the rest of the community? > > 4) David Epstein in "Range" argues that "specializing" too early can be > counterproductive and that generalists who find their path later in life > tend to excel and be more creative, agile and able to make connections > that specialists miss. (me-The connections part especially resonates > with me). What are the implications for our educational systems (Limudei > Kodesh and Chol across the orthodox spectrum?)) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of http://www.aishdas.org/asp greater vanity in others; it makes us vain, Author: Widen Your Tent in fact, of our modesty. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980) From micha at aishdas.org Thu Aug 22 14:52:32 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: <20190820212522.GA10000@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190822215232.GB1869@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:58:42PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> Chazal didn't have double-blind testing or a field of statistics. Instead, >> something that worked three times was considered effective > So 3 out of 10 (100....) is all good? We asked this before without getting an answer. They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. I looked in the gemara already discussed, in the SA (OC 301:25), Tur, and Rambam Hil' Shabbos 19:14. Maybe someone else knows. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Take time, http://www.aishdas.org/asp be exact, Author: Widen Your Tent unclutter the mind. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Thu Aug 22 19:17:44 2019 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:17:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: RAM added: > If the above is correct, then it turns out that this joyful surprise (that the Tisha B'Av death had ended) occurred right in the middle of the Shloshim for Aharon Hakohen. < ...and perhaps the "Vayishma...vayishma" victory recorded in P'Chuqas, immediately after Aharon's death on R'Ch' Av and prior to "vayis'u meiHor haHar," occurred in that month of Av, such that, lacking a precise date, we would associate it w/ the middle of Av? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:45:36 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:45:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823194536.GB28032@aishdas.org> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:11:50PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Rabbenu Bachye on Shmos 12:2 quotes Rabbenu Chananel, that for the 40 years > in the Midbar, Kiddush Hachodesh must have been Al Pi Cheshbon, and not Al > Pi R'iyah, because the moon (and sun) could not be seen for that entire > time, because the Ananei Hakavod were blocking the view... They hold that qiddush hachodesh was ALWAYS al pi cheshbon, that re'iyah is part of court procedings, but was never intended to be how BD chose the date. To quote "Vekhasav Rabeinu Chananeil z"l: Qevi'us hachadashim eino ela al pi hacheshbon..." A raayah is brought from Shemu'el I "hinei chodesh machar". See there fore details. What you bring about the cloud and the amud ha'eish making re'iyah impossible is just his first ecample among many. Also, R Chananel is quoted as saying "velo ra'u bekhulam shemesh bayom velo yareiach balaylah." So, not being able to see the sliver of moon for eidus for RC doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't tell when the moon was too full to be the 9th anymore. Maybe they couldn't see if it was exactrly round, but 9 be'Av is just a shade more than half. As for an actual on-topic answer.... Still doing my research. The question of "bein bizmanan bein shelo mizmanan" is bugging me. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that http://www.aishdas.org/asp a person can change their future Author: Widen Your Tent by merely changing their attitude. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 23 12:33:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:33:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190823193319.GA28032@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 01:31:23AM +0100, allan.engel--- via Avodah wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From driceman at optimum.net Sun Aug 25 09:55:05 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> RJR: > I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). Me: Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin?s psak entails the same problem. RMB: > Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the > pesaqim are tightly correlated? > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn?t find anything conclusive, but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that the Sanhedrin can?t function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, which seems unrealistic. See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/rambam.aspx?sefer=14&hilchos=79&perek=10&halocha=5&hilite= I?m guessing here that RJR?s inconsistencies are correlated the the Rambam?s ta?amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B?Yhuda second edition HM 3 (which I didn?t?t look up inside) confirming a psak BD based on two contradictory ta?amim (with the third judge advocating no monetary award). Nobody I noticed suggested that such a peak would bind the future psakim of the judges or the court. And see Hazon Ish al HaRambam Hashlamos H. Mamrim 1:4 that Hazal after the Hurban still had the status of Sanhedrin. http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=14333#p=737&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= And there is an issue d?orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after having decided a case, so I don?t see how RMB?s elegant suggestion would be viable. David Riceman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 11:51:27 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:51:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190826185126.GB20111@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:18:06PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Near the bottom of Taanis 30b, Rashi tells the story that in the Midbar, on > each Erev Tisha B'Av, everyone would dig a grave for himself and sleep in > it that night. Most people woke up in the morning, but not all. (Other > seforim do the math: 600,000 were to die each of the 40 years, which comes > to 15,000 each Tisha B'av.) In Rashi's words: Rashbam, according to Tosafos there. > Here's my question: If someone says 'Perhaps we made a mistake in > calculating the month,' then that person is clearly rejecting the halacha > that a declaration of Rosh Chodesh is valid even if the "wrong" day was > declared... There is a parallel gemara on the bottom of BB 121a. The Ramban ad loc avoids your problem. Which doesn't help us answer the Pesiqta Rabasi (33:1) Rashi quotes, but... In the 40th year, why was anyone worried? After all, everyone left knew of themselves they weren't of age or perhaps even born when the decree was made. So who was lying in graves? So he says Tu beAv is the date in year 39 that shiv'ah ended for the last time for those who died because of cheit hameraglim. Whereas Tosafos (BB) say they died in year 40 too, and they knew the gezeira was over when there was no one left to die. In fact, looking back at the Ramban, he cites "HaRav R Shmuel za"l" -- perhaps the baal tosafos in question? (Aside from being 1 year later.) Now, continuing for both... ... And that is the definition of "kalu meisei midbar". Fits even better when you look at the next line (in either gemara), where it continues to say and that's when Moshe's panim-el-Panim nevu'ah returned. (Based on Devarim 2:16) Since nevu'ah requires simchah, tying it to the end of aveilus seems intuitive. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember; http://www.aishdas.org/asp I do, then I understand." - Confucius Author: Widen Your Tent "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 17:48:02 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> References: <5121AAF4-3B23-43AF-803A-14F0AE4B1728@optimum.net> <20190822190345.GB4207@aishdas.org> <8CC90FCA-F4C9-48A9-B6FB-D99876E46836@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20190827004802.GA20721@aishdas.org> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 12:55:05PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Would the Sanhedrin have had two unrelated votes on halakhos where the >> pesaqim are tightly correlated? > > I looked for this over Shabbos. I didn't find anything conclusive, > but I did find some hints. Conceptually, though, that would imply that > the Sanhedrin can't function as a court of appeal for normal disputes, > which seems unrealistic. > > See. H. Sanhedrin 10:5. ... > I'm guessing here that RJR's inconsistencies are correlated the the > Rambam's ta'amim. But see Shach HM 25 SK 19:2 > http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8762 > who suggests that there is a typo in the Rambam. > > And see Pischei Tshuva SK 7 there who cites the Noda B'Yhuda second > edition HM 3 (which I didn't't look up inside) confirming a psak BD > based on two contradictory ta'amim (with the third judge advocating no > monetary award)... ... > And there is an issue d'orayysa for a judge to refuse to rule after > having decided a case, so I don't see how RMB's elegant suggestion would > be viable. I missed the connection. I am not talking that it's assur to rule on the same question in BD, or even the topic I thought we were talking about -- related questions. Rather, that Sanhedrin has an obligation to find consistency. So that if rov end up holding Y on the second question, that rov could overturn a vote which ruled X on the first one. That you can't vote on one case without simulatenously it being a vote on the other. Admittedly, it's just something I made up. But I don't see the connection you're making between my hypothesis and the case you're discussing. In fact, that Rambam and Shakh came to mind before you wrote them -- you have brought that sugya to our attention enough times I was bound to think of them whenever the words "Sanhedrin" and "consistency" come up. Just letting you know, someone listens. But... You are jumping from having inconcsistent te'amim for a single (and thus consistent) pesaq to allowing for two pesaqim for which no set of consistent te'amim could exist. And again, I am totally missing why appeals comes into this discussion. You have to spend more time explaining; you lost me. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element http://www.aishdas.org/asp in us could exist without the human element Author: Widen Your Tent or vice versa. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Mon Aug 26 16:23:55 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:23:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Showering During the 9 Days In-Reply-To: <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> References: <20190808195008.GA26379@aishdas.org> <00eb01d5514f$34a34840$9de9d8c0$@bezeqint.net> <62B74B30-A5B9-4A3E-A11E-122F777BA25A@sibson.com> Message-ID: <20190826232355.GA29389@aishdas.org> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > IIUC the Rav did Not disagree about hashkafa being important but rather > felt that it was derived from halacha... Well... RYBS's hashkafah is more existential than metaphysics or theology. Meaning (since I likely abused at least one word in that last sentence), RYBS focused on what it is like to be an observant Jew, and not about issues of G-d, how He runs the universe, etc... For example, when RYBS speaks of tzimtzum, he speaks of Moshe's anavah emulating Divine Tzimtzum. And nothing about how the world came to be. He has dialectics of archetypes, and all of them speak to his own experience. Second, those existential observations are taken as lessons from halakhah. (As RJR said.) RYBS's term is "halachic hermeneuitics". What halakhah says to me is a different hunt than thinking one can find the reason or Hashem's purpose in commanding something. >From Halakhic Mind (pp 101-102): ... [T]here is only a single source from which a Jewish philosophical weltanschauung could emerge: the objective order - the Halakha ... Out of the sources of Halakha, a new world view awaits formulation. Not only ein dorshin taama diqra, but while obviously studied the classics of hashkafah, and those who look for the nimshalim of medrash and aggadita, that's not the basis of his own hashkafa. It's as close as a Brisker could get to an interest in hashkafah: one has to have halakhah come first and is the only objective truth. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When faced with a decision ask yourself, http://www.aishdas.org/asp "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now, Author: Widen Your Tent at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?" - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From driceman at optimum.net Tue Aug 27 17:06:29 2019 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei dSatrei Message-ID: <9A943AEF-8EA0-4DB8-8EB0-8289B9A5EB85@optimum.net> RMB found my previous post obscure, so I'm trying to write out an argument in full. I'm visiting relatives and have limited internet access and no library access so l'm citing minimal sources. Usually the Mishna quotes psak halacha -- case law. Often the amoraim construe the psak to be an example of a legal principle. I'll use the term ta'am. "Ta'am" can mean different things in different contexts, but it's used for legal principles in the examples I intend to cite. In an ideal world we could identify a ta'am from a psak, but often amoraim disagree about which ta'am generated the psak they're discussing. Sometimes even tannaim argue about this. Leaf through masseches Eduyos and you'll see that the very strong bias of the mishna is to preserve piskei halacha without preserving ta'amim. This bias is recognized in halacha; a beis din will record a psak din routinely, but when asked to record ta'amim they will individuate the record ??" one dayan said X, two dayanim said Y, and two more said Z.(source?) Let me introduce a bit more terminology. A "pure psak" is one that can have been motivated by only one ta'am, and a "mixed psak" is one that have been motivated by more than one ta'am. I wonder if there's a third type ??" one that could have been generated only by a vote. If I come up with an example I'll add another term here. Let's pause to consider Tshuvos Noda B'Yehudah II HM 3. The case is this (he gives few details). Reuven sues Shimon for $100, $50 for grama (indirect damages), and $50 for the cost of a failed attempt at recovery of the first $50. One dayan rules against both claims, one rules in favor only of the first, and one rules in favor only of the second. If there had been two votes, one for each claim, Shimon would have won both claims, but the vote was on total monetary damages, and the court ruled that Shimon owed Reuven $50. Rabbi Landau upheld the ruling. In summary, RYL ruled that battei din vote on psak, not on ta'am. It's hard to learn anything definitive about grama from this claim because we have the details neither of the case nor of the individual dayanim's reasoning. Observe, however, that no dayan voted for both claims. Can we conclude that the claims are contradictory? I don't think so. But if we impute ta'amim to piskei dinim, as one of my rebbeim often did to the tshuvos cited in Pischei Tshuvah, and as the amoraim seem to do when citing the mishna, we might end up drawing that conclusion. I want to expand this point. PT on SA usually cites the psak but not the ta'am. My rebbi of the previous paragraph grew up in a poor town in Poland, where he did not have access to the original tshuvos, but even in America, where we had an ample library, his preferred methodology was to impute ta'amim to the cited psakim rather than look them up. That seems to have been the expectation of the author of PT as well. So what's my problem? I was trained to pasken based on ta'am. Certainly the gemara assumes something like that. The standard question "may kasavar?" is predicated on "doesn't this imply that the author accepts two contradictory ta'amim?" But if a psak is mixed how can I get a ta'am from it? Why does halacha use a methodology which increases uncertainty? This is more of a problem now than it used to be. The life portrayed by the Shulhan Aruch is not very different from the life portrayed by the Mishna, so psakim can easily be followed for generations. Nowadays we have stainless steel pots and limited liability corporations, and we can decide their halachic status only by imputing ta'amim to presumptively mixed psak. So RJR worries about mixing "methodologies", because they may somehow contradict each other. He doesn't give details, but I, obsessed as I am, can't but wonder whether the "methodologies" are proxies for ta'amim. Do two poskim who accept the same ta'amim necessarily use the same methodology, or are our problems generally distinct? RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? So how do I justify the methodology I grew up with? Why does the PT not cite ta'amim? What's really going on? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Tue Aug 27 18:34:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:34:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: <20190828013429.GA17580@aishdas.org> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg The chart opens with a list of talking speeds: Average speed of conversation: 110-150 words per minute Audio books are recited at: 150-160 wpm Auctioneers talk at a rate of: 250-400 wpm Then multiplies these speeds out by the number of words in numerous tefillos. For example, a 2.9 min Nusach Ashkenaz Shemoneh Esrei, or a 3.3 min Nusach Sfard one means you're daveing at slow auctioneer speed. There is a whole table. See the picture at the link. You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for me for the past day or two. Here is RBK's accompanying text : This Shabbat, my sermon noted that my upbringing in Reform Temple Beth El of Great Neck properly taught me, among other things, one basic halachah: the requirement to recite all one's prayers and blessings with feeling and understanding. One cannot do this while reciting the siddur at the speed of an auctioneer (daily amidah of 3 minutes, for example) as is routine for many Orthodox Jews; instead, one must speak slowly and enunciate deliberately - as is fitting for addressing the Master of All. #HowFastDoYouPray #PrayerSpeedLimit And R Reuven Spolter blogged his response "The Pace of Tefillah: In Defense of the Daily Minyan - the People Who Show Up Every Day" at . Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I want to do it." - is weak. Author: Widen Your Tent "I am doing it." - that is the right way. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk From JRich at sibson.com Tue Aug 27 22:56:34 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:56:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot Message-ID: The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. It would be interesting to see what alternative rewards system a compensation consultant might come up with to support the same desired results. Of course a good consultant would tell you compensation is only a part, and often not the key driver, in the market/employee value proposition! Kt Joel ric 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 Tue Aug 27 22:58:44 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag Message-ID: Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership also be a factor in halachic determinations? 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 akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Aug 28 05:14:40 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Clarke?s first law states that any sufficiently advanced > technology is indistinguishable from magic. If so, how did > Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic > sources (since no one knew how these treatments actually > worked [and in the end they didn?t])? First of all, if anyone is thrown by the reference to Clarke, please see the THIRD law at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know what works? No, we don't.] Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources) >>>. In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, and not a form of assur magic? As a specific example, I was going to cite aspirin, which clearly works, though I had long believed we don't know HOW it works. Then I saw Wikipedia ("aspirin") state <<< In 1971, British pharmacologist John Robert Vane, then employed by the Royal College of Surgeons in London, showed aspirin suppressed the production of prostaglandinsand thromboxanes. For this discovery he was awarded the 1982 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, jointly with Sune Bergstr?m and Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson. >>> Given this revelation, my question will be: How was aspirin muttar *prior to* 1971? The generally accepted belief was that it DOES work, but that we didn't yet understand the mechanism by which it works. In such a scenario, how did we ascribe it to muttar refuah, and not to forbidden magic? Disclaimer: The above is intended to he a clarification of RJR's post. I really don't think I've added anything substantial, except for people who may not have understood the original. On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: > They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei > mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. > And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses > is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology > allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers is enough to convince me of that.) Note that although they weren't on our level of requiring double-blind randomized tests, I do recall some poskim saying things like, "It's not enough that the qemeia worked three times; it has to work three *consecutive* times." Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 05:12:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . R' Allan Engel wrote: > The paradigm that allowed new derashos on pesukim (until 'sof mishna' - > presumably the end of the era of Tannaim) explicitly allows for changes in > halachic practice on the basis of new derashos. R' Micha Berger responded: > And contrary to RAM's recollection -- one of them is Moavi velo Moavis. > > Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni > in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what > will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? > > I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed > convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. Thank you. I accept the correction. Halacha can indeed change, if one's proofs are strong enough, like in this case. But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or not? If you understand "the derashah" to explain a second conversion, then it must be that prior to the derashah, Moabites were not allowed to convert at all, but after the derashah, female Moabites were now allowed to convert. If so, then Rus converted illegally at the beginning of the story (I don't know whether or not that would have been valid b'dieved or not), and then converted k'halacha after the derasha. Is that what you're saying? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Aug 29 08:00:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28/8/19 8:14 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > In other words, if our best medical minds believe that a specific > treatment DOES work, but they cannot explain HOW it works, then we can > (and MUST) ask: how do we know that this is a muttar medical treatment, > and not a form of assur magic? Who says magic is assur? AIUI the only difference between kishuf and sefer yetzira is which powers one uses for it. Kishuf is doing things by the powers of tum'ah, the names of shedim, etc., while doing the exact same thing using shemos hakedoshim is 100% mutar. IOW kishuf is *black* magic; white magic is mutar. *Fake* magic is AIUI assur mid'rabanan because it *purports* to be the work of sheidim, which would imply that a fake magician who pretends to invoke kedusha would be fine, and certainly that one who (like almost all modern magicians) openly denies that he has any real power should be fine, even mid'rabanan. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Aug 29 20:13:29 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:13:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . >From R' Micha Berger: > R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. > http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg > ... > You might want to see where you stand; could help motivate > slowing down enough to think. At least it's been of help for > me for the past day or two. If it has helped you, that is great, and I applaud it. But my first reaction is that there are many people who would find ways to quibble with R' Kornblau's methodology. For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. I got this idea a number of years ago, when I suddenly noticed some odd things about my own davening. At one point, I realized that my lips were moving, but no sound at all was coming out. And when I say "no sound", I don't mean that the whisper was so quiet that I couldn't hear myself; I mean that my breathing had paused, and no sound of any kind was coming out. On another occasion, I noticed (again while my lips were moving) that my throat was making a noise that I could describe only as a low buzz, sounding nothing like any human language that I know of. [And another time, the words were coming out fine, but I noticed that my eyes were progressing along an entirely different page. But that's a whole 'nother problem, for a whole 'nother thread.] Practical implementation of this plan is not difficult nowadays. Many smartphones have a Voice Recorder which works perfectly for this. Simply set it up, turn it on, hold it close enough to pick up your voice, and daven exactly as you usually do. Another option is to dial an unattended telephone, and let the answering machine record your voice. In my opinion this procedure is far too distracting to do during Shmoneh Esreh, but Al Hamichyah and Aleinu would work just as well. The important thing is to make a recording that is a good representation of what you usually do. And then listen to that recording and remind yourself that although Hashem knows what's in our hearts, He also wants to hear the words. Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Aug 30 07:17:48 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:13:29PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > From R' Micha Berger: >> R' Barry Kornblau posted this chart on Facebook. >> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/daveningSpeedChart.jpg ... > For such people, I have an alternate suggestion: An individual should > create an audio recording of him/herself, reciting some tefila in his usual > way. The person then listens to that recording, and judges for himself > whether or not he actually said the words well enough. This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get in the way of RBK's goal. (Pity I don't habe an email address with which to invite him to this conversation.) RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words clearly. If you slow down by spending brain-time on how you are uttering the words, you aren't freeing up attention to say them with meaning. ... > Of course, there will be some people who, for the purposes of this > experiment, will deliberately enunciate the words just a bit better than > usual, to help the recording come out well. Such people don't really need > to listen to the recording afterwards; they already have their answer. I think there would be more people who simply because they're thinking about the subject will end up on the better end of their bell curve *without* consciously trying. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Sep 1 11:57:30 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:57:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven Message-ID: . I had a suggestion: > ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for > himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. R' Micha Berger responded: > This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get > in the way of RBK's goal. ... > RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. > You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words > clearly. I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of steps towards reaching that goal. My understanding is that if one says his prayers with a basic appreciation for what he is doing, then he will be yotzay on some level, even if he doesn't understand the individual words. On the other hand, if he understands the words, but the essential parts come out as gibberish (or worse, not at all) then there is no degree of kavanna that can make up for the fact that simply *did* *not* *say* the tefilah. That's why I think one's first goal should be to actually enunciate the words. Once we agree on that l'halacha, then we can move on to the l'maaseh, which I suppose could involve a comparative weighting of various tefilos, and even of phrases within those tefilos. Certainly, the portions that are m'akev one's chiyuv would rank higher, and portions that are "merely" minhag would rank lower. One would also ask, "How accurate must the pronunciation be? Which inaccuracies are m'akev?" But those are mere details. My main point is that the top priority must be to actually say the words. Too often, I see people who think they're saying Birkas Hamazon, but their lips are barely moving, not even for sounds (like b and m) which are difficult or impossible to say if the lips don't touch. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From achdut18 at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 2 23:24:34 2019 From: achdut18 at mail.gmail.com (Avram Sacks) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 01:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> References: <20190830141748.GD1762@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <72430663.20190903012434@gmail.com> The issue of davening speed is a major pet peeve of mine. I belong to a shul of "fast daveners." I rarely keep up and usually get to shul earlier on shabbat by about 15 -- 20 minutes in order to get a running "head start." My seat in the main shul is two rows in directly in front of the shulchan, so I can sometimes hear the shaliach tzibbur muttering words under his breath. A few years ago there was one shaliach tzibbur, with smicha, no less (but NOT the rav of the shul!), who muttered the words of the first paragraph of Aleinu, and then nearly a second or two after he finished the last word of the first paragraph, I heard him say "v'ne'emar... I asked him after davening how he was able to get so quickly from the end of the first paragraph to "v'ne'emar." In Columbo-like fashion I asked how he did it, because, I had only formally started to learn Hebrew at age 8, and wondered if he had some technique that allowed him to get to "v'ne'emar with such amazing speed. His only response was "good point," and I have never heard him go so fast, ever since. In a shul that I infrequently visit out of town, the rav of the shul davens every word of every t'filla out loud in order to keep the shaliach tzibbur from going to fast. I find that too distracting, but it does ensure that the shaliach tzibbur will never go so fast as to skip words. In another shul, locally, there is a card at the shulchan where the shaliach tzibbur stands, that indicates at what time the shaliach tzibbur should arrive at given points in the davening. That, too, I found to be too distracting -- at least when I davened there as a shaliach tzibbur. The rav of our shul tries to slow things down at shma and at the amidah, but that only helps to some degree. Respectfully, I disagree with the comments of R. Spolter. Yes, there is merit in showing up, but I often find that my experience, particularly at shacharit, is far less spiritually moving when I am in shul and feel like I am always racing to keep up. It is particularly stressful if I have a yahrtzeit and am not leading the davening because there are also others who have yahrtzeit. There have been times (albeit rare) when I have not yet finished the shmoneh esrai when kaddish is being said. I do not believe I daven inordinately slow. I can say the t'fillot relatively quickly, but not like an auctioneer! So, is there a halachic obligation to daven with kavana? Is there a halachic obligation to even just SAY THE WORDS? Years ago, I was taught it is not ok to just "scan" the words, or "think." One must actually say them. So, I don't quite understand R. Spolter's defense of speed davening and t'filla skipping. If I am to not only say the words, but to have a sense of the meaning of most of them, AND time for some self-reflection, which, after all, is what davening is supposed to be about -- there is a reason that the Hebrew word, l'hitpalel, is reflexive in form!! -- I do not believe R. Spolter's position is so defensible. (And, as an attorney, I don't think it would be such a terrible thing for those of us in the United States, to regularly recite the U.S. Constitution. But, that is a different post for a different forum....) Kol tuv, Avi Avram Sacks From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 12:55:05 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] reward for mitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903195505.GA31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:56:34AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Drashot Haran (Drasha #6) posits that while HKB"H set varying "gmul" > (reward) for the 613 mitzvoth, he didn't tell us which (me-positive ones) > had greater reward in order that we not focus only on those mitzvoth > but rather try to do all in hopes that we include the high value targets. Since lefum tzzara agra, the sekhar for a mitzvah depends on the situation that a person finds themselves in and their own abilities to make the right choice. So, wihtout knowing your own nequdas habechirah really well, without fooling yourself, you couldn't know the value of a mitzvah. And why tzadiqim are judged kechut hasa'arah. (Still: We do rank mitzvos by the sekhar or onesh listed in the chumash for qal vachomer purposes.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person must be very patient http://www.aishdas.org/asp even with himself. Author: Widen Your Tent - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chazal accept medicinal treatments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903201100.GB31109@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Next, I would say the same thing as others have posted, but in much simpler > terms, that it doesn't matter whether these treatments ACTUALLY worked, as > long as Chazal BELIEVED they worked. [Let's be honest. Do we really know > what works? No, we don't.] > Thus, I believe the question should be reworded to <<< how did Chazal > accept any medicinal treatments from non-halachic sources)>>>. ... I want to make explicit something that I think is implied in what you said. The amoraim of Bavel spent a lot more space talking about sheidim, qemeios, and all those other things the Rambam would have preferred they not bring up than the amoraim of EY. The number of references one finds on the Yerushalmi can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and with spare fingers too. But then, the same was true of the beliefs of the surrounding Bavli culture. Did Chazal buy into local superstitions? Or, were sheidim (eg) seen as science? Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was no contradiction between the two. Getting back to Clark's Third Law... The inverse is also true: Once science is sufficiently disproven, it is indistinguishable from superstition. > On a related note, R' Micha Berger posted: >> They only talk about establishing a qemeia mumcheh or a rofei >> mumcheh or a refu'ah. They don't talk about counter-evidence. >> And yet one doesn't need to know that 3 out of hundreds of uses >> is more likely to be a fluke or "coincidence" (if your theology >> allows for actual coincidences) than proof the medicine worked. > That's according to OUR understanding of probability. It seems that Chazal > (or possibly the ancients in general) had an entirely different way of > looking at these things. (The classic example of the nine kosher butchers > is enough to convince me of that.) ... I agree with your general point. But once I came up with a way to explain qavua to myself, the fact that we take a majority of qavu'os, and not a majority of pieces of meat didn't surprise me. The very presence of a qavu'ah (or 9, in the case of stores) already killed our motivation for a purely statistical solution. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. http://www.aishdas.org/asp - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Tue Sep 3 13:20:45 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:20:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How Fast Do You Daven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190903202045.GC31109@aishdas.org> On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 02:57:30PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >>> ... The person then listens to that recording, and judges for >>> himself whether or not he actually said the words well enough. > R' Micha Berger responded: >> This is a different goal, and I think your methodology would get >> in the way of RBK's goal. ... >> RBK wrote about going slow enough to think about peirush hamilim. >> You are talking about going slow enough to actually say the words >> clearly. > I think it is safe to say that RMB and I agree that one's ultimate goal > should include (among many other things) BOTH peirush hamilim and saying > them clearly. The question on which we *might* disagree is the sequence of > steps towards reaching that goal. I just meant that RBK's exercise isn't specific to either goal, but his verbiage was about peirush hamilim. However, your exercise is specific to performing the mitzvah maasis correctly and would get in the way of thinking about peirush hamilim. (By giving the person something else to keep their mind on.) So, you didn't really propose and alternative means to the same ends. But since you did raise the topic of sequence... I am reminded of the line where someone asked R Yisrael Salander that since he only had 15 minutes to learn each day, should he learn Mussar or the regular gefe"t (Gemara -- peirush [i.e. Rashi] -- Tosafos)? RYS said that he should spend the time learning Mussar, and then he would realize he really had more than 15 minutes! Learn peirush hamilim, learn to care about tefillah and that one is speaking with the Creator, and what kinds of things Anshei Keneses haGdolah, Chazal and the geonim think that relationship should revolve about. Then you'll notice you're motivated to do it right. But make tefillah into a frumkeit, a ritual with a list of boxes to be checked, and I don't know if kavvanah would naturally follow. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger People were created to be loved. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Things were created to be used. Author: Widen Your Tent The reason why the world is in chaos is that - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF things are being loved, people are being used. From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 4 10:37:14 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:37:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Brachos and Continuous Creation Message-ID: <20190904173714.GB19860@aishdas.org> You may have heard the thought that "Yotzeir haMe'oros" is written in lashon hoveh because the RBSO didn't create the me'oros and then they continue to persist. Rather, He is creating and recreating everything continually. "Hamchadeish beTuvo bekhol yom tamid." Our persistence is as much an act of creation as the original moments when things came to be. In Arukh haShulchan OC 46:3, RYMEpstein notes that this is only one example. Every berakhah concludes belashon hoveh: Nosein haTorah, Borei peri ha'adamah. And therefore says our nusach "haNosein lasekhvi vinah" (Rambam, Tur, SA) is iqar, not what we have in our girsa'os of the gemara, "asher nasan lasekhvi binah". He then adds, "Asher Yatzar" starts out belashon avar, because it's about what just happened, but there to the chasimah is "Rofei khol basar". I want to combine this with something RYME writes in OC 4:2. There he talks about the shift from second to third "Person" grammar in berakhos. "Barukh Atah" talks to a You. However, "asher qidishanu" or "hanosein" or whatever talks about a He. We similarly find in a number of mizmorim and hoda'os "Atah Hu". His Atzumus is ne'elam mikol ne'eman. The seraphim and ophanim have no idea. They and we only know Him by His actions. And therefore "Barukh kevod H' mimqomo" -- His Kavod, which we can understand something about, because they are His Actions. But not His Atzmus. So, when we speak of something we receive from Him, we are talking about Hashem's action, and can use the word Atah. But RYME doesn't explain why then we switch to the third "Person" langage the chasimah. Perhaps this idea from 46:3 is why. We can relate to Hashem providing us the bread beforee us. But can we relate to Maaseh Bereishis being lemaaleh min hazman, such that His providing us that bread is the same Action as His creating the concept of wheat, it properties, and the first wheat, to begin with? (I will repeat my obsersation that in lashon haqodesh, present tense verbs and adjectives and nouns all blend together. When we say "haNosein lasekhvi" are we saying Hashem is giving now (verb), or that He is the Giver? And if the latter, do we mean, "the King of the universe Who gives" (adjectival) or are we continuing the list, "Hashem, our, G-d, the King of the universe, the One Who gives..." (noun)? Li nir'eh the point is they are all the same thing -- you are what you are doing.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow http://www.aishdas.org/asp than you were today, Author: Widen Your Tent then what need do you have for tomorrow? - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:38:19 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:38:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av Message-ID: RMB: > Closer to our case: > If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin > afterward. I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." This makes it sound like not everybody agrees. Now I see that the SA (30:5) quotes it anonymously: "SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." The Mishna Berura along with most other Nosei Keilim ( https://tinyurl.com/Sefaria-OC-30-5 ) suggest you wear them w/o a Bracha. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:09:44 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:09:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei Message-ID: From: David Riceman > RJR: >> I've always felt that going to more than one poseik (even in different areas of psak) raises >> the likelihood that one will be accepting positions which are based on a higher order tartei >> dsatrei (Internal inconsistencies that even the poseik may not be consciously aware of). > Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's psak entails the > same problem. > > David Riceman Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all (or at least a majority) agreed. As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. - Danny From doniels at gmail.com Thu Sep 5 04:56:26 2019 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:56:26 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R Moshe Feinstein as posek hador Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 06:13:09PM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > I've come across a event described in a couple of medical halacha books > which I find intriguing for reasons unrelated to medical halacha. In 1948 > there was an outbreak of meningitis in Jerusalem with a limited supply > of penicillin, less than the amount needed to treat all the present > cases. Rav Herzog, the chief rabbi, called Rav Moshe Feinstein in New > York to ask how to prioritise the use of life saving penicillin... > Why did R Herzog not ask the chazon ish or other posek in EY? ... > And, if it was a pure question of pure seniority/shoulders in psak... Um... based on https://tinyurl.com/wikipedia-he-dateline Rav Herzog disagreed with the Chazon Ish regarding the dateline - about 2 years before this incident happened. Seemingly RH he didn't feel that he was subservient to the CI. (Strangely enough, even though the CI was elevated (by whom?) to the status of Uber-posek (similar, at some level, to the Chofetz Chaim and the Vilna Gaon and the Bes Yosef) I wonder how many people pasken 100% like the CI (or the CC or the VG or the BY). There seems to be a lot of picking and choosing, a la "oh we do THIS as per the Ari z"l/Gro/Minhag/______. Maybe that's more for Areivim... - or another thread.) - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 5 10:45:29 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Boray M'oray Ha'esh on Tisha B'Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190905174529.GA31775@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:38:19PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> Closer to our case: >> If you daven maariv at pelag, you are not permitted to wear tefillin >> afterward. > > I'm not sure the Aruch haShulchan agrees with that. See 30:8 - " the > Beis Yosef writes that SOME SAY that if you daven maariv at pelag, you > are not permitted to wear tefillin afterward." I had actually just learned 30:8* which is why that example came to mind. Yes, he quotes it as a yeish omerim in the machaber, explaining that it is because it would be a "tereo qolei desasrei". Then the AhS goes on with "velachein" if he didn't daven [maariv] but the tzibbur did, he can still wear tefillin. And then moved on to the next case. There is no quote or explanaiton of other shitos. It seems he holds like the yeish mi she'omer. For that matter, the SA himself quotes the yeish mi she'omer only. Which the Kaf haChaim says is NOT indication that others say otherwise. Rather, that it's the mechaber's style to posit his own chiddushim with some weaker lashon. And we can deduce from silends that the Rama agreed with this chiddush, no? And similarly the Taz only explains the SA and moves on. The Kaf haChaim, though, does list the acharonim that are probably the ones the MB tells us he is relying on. So, I think the AhS does agree, and he is far from alone. But, it's not open and shut, as I had thought. Related, we hold that laylah zeman tefillin. Which the AhS says explains that next case in the SA, someone who puts on tefillin thinking it is day, but it is still night. He doesn't have to make a berakhah again when day really does start. Rather, chazal were oqeir besheiv ve'al taaseh the mitzvah of wearing tefillin at night in a gezeira to prevent falling asleep in them. In our case... I could see how it would explain ruling that one should wear tefillin after maariv but before sheqi'ah. Mide'oraisa, there is no tarta desasrei, because even if maariv is syaing it's night time, mideoraisa there is still a mitzvah of tefillin. And miderabbanan -- it's not after sheqi'ah, how increased is the risk of falling asleep? The MB takes lechumerah -- both on wearing tefillin and on berakhah levatalah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, http://www.aishdas.org/asp if only because it offers us the opportunity of Author: Widen Your Tent self-fulfilling prophecy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Arthur C. Clarke From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Sep 6 12:38:37 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:38:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 Message-ID: I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.). Does anybody know more about this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sat Sep 7 18:31:00 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 21:31:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tehillim 27 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/9/19 3:38 pm, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > I was listening to a shiur on Tehillim 27, and the rav said that he > thinks that Sefardim and Edot Mizrachi say Tehillim 27 every day (as > opposed to Ashkenazi minhag to say it in Elul, etc.).? Does anybody know > more about this? Check any Sefardi siddur, before Maariv. I happen to have "Siddur Beit Tefillah" (J'm, 1993) handy, and it says "yesh nohagim lomar mizmorim eilu lifnei tefilat arvit", followed by #27 and the assortment of pesukim that are common in all nuscha'ot (including many Ashkenaz sidurim, but not Artscroll) before maariv. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sat Sep 7 15:03:12 2019 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:03:12 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Sep 6, 2019 12:34:36 pm Message-ID: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > no contradiction between the two. > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly. Consequently I am highly motivated to think up a possible rational justification for their belief in astrology. This is what I have come up with: in the time and place where our Sages lived, diet varied with the seasons. Therefore, so did nutritional deficiencies (thus, in Northern European countries, until a couple centuries ago, most people got scurvy every Winter). Nutritional deficiencies at different gestational stages could have different effects on the unborn child -- e.g., an iron deficiency at a gestational age of one month could have a different effect than a salt deficiency at a gestational age of five months. The effect would be very slight because the mother absorbs most of the nutritional deficiencies herself (e.g., if you have no calcium in your diet when you are pregnant, you will give your baby the calcium in your body, and your teeth will fall out), but there really might have been a slight but nonzero correlation between a person's character and the season of his birth. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 North Whipple Street Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur" From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 05:57:01 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:57:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? Message-ID: What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of something like "shout with joy" -- Jastrow points me towards ?????. (hariyah -- hey-reish-yud-heh) which in modern day Hebrew (al pi HaRav Google) is "cheers". That fits many places (e.g., Tehillim 150 "b'tziltzilei truah"). It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah), although somebody (was it Rashi?) connects it to the two-letter shoresh "reish ayin" meaning friend (pointing to a pasuk related to Bilaam). Both of those seem to have positive connotations. But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to be a sigh (or cry?). Thoughts? KvCh! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 9 07:52:48 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 10:52:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 9 09:07:09 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 12:07:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190909160709.GB16016@aishdas.org> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > What does "teruah" mean? Most definitions I've seen are along the lines of > something like "shout with joy"... ... > It seems somewhat related in Tehillim 27 (zivchei teruah)... .. > Both of those seem to have positive connotations. > > But it's not apparent to me how this definition squares with "Yom Teruah" > (ok, maybe), but harder is the shofar sound of teruah, which is supposed to > be a sigh (or cry?). The gemara disputes which aspect of Sisera's mother's crying for her son a teru'ah reenacts. Whether it should be genuchei gana (a shevarim in modern parlance), or yelulei yalal (what we call a teru'ah) -- or both. A machloqes between whether teru'ah refers to a moan or a whimper. And the targum for "Yom Teru'ah" is "Yom Yevavah". Not happy stuff. According to RSRH, ra means evil because of its derivation from the shoresh /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter. /reish-vav-ayin/ is a different shoresh, but RSRH would consider them related. R' Matisyahu Clark, in his dictionary systematizing RSRH's methodology, talks about the general relationship between vav-hapo'al roots and pei-ayin-ayin ones. So I think the fact that the sound is broken is the primary etymology of the word. A short, stocatto, sound. And "haleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah" -- most say this is describing the crash of symbols. Metzudas Tzion says chatzotzros, which doesn't disprove our point, but does defuse this example as an indicator. And from there, broken sound that expresses emotion. After all, Middle Eastern women ulelate at the joy of a family simchah, or in morning (as in the gemara's "yelulei yalal" of Eim Sisera). But that part, about the extreme emotion being the cause of the sound rather than what kind of emotion, was said by others. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space. http://www.aishdas.org/asp In that space is our power to choose our Author: Widen Your Tent response. In our response lies our growth - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM) From simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 9 09:13:22 2019 From: simon.montagu at mail.gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:13:22 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What does "teruah" mean? In-Reply-To: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> References: <5535c437-2b47-83bc-1a82-f0f8a20b96c5@sero.name> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:44 PM Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > AIUI the Kara'im understand it to mean "to make a loud noise", so on Yom > Teruah (which they refuse to call Rosh Hashana because that's in Nissan) > they shout. Of course they're wrong about the mitzvah, but they can > probably be trusted about the word's literal meaning. A related question: in Joshua 6 when all the people "hari`u teru`a gedola", did they shout a great shout, or sound a great teru`a on shofarot? From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 11 01:09:46 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:09:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 11 01:11:04 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] whose learning comes first Message-ID: I?d be interested in approximate statistics from communal Rabbis in the daat torah community ? How many questions (per 100 family units with marriageable age children) do they get from working parents (fathers) whose children are in the shidduch process of the nature of ?what is the appropriate trade off of my working more hours (at the cost of my timing) /delaying retiring (at the cost of my learning) in order that my son/son-in-law be able to continue full time earning for x years?? (What are the statistics on the answers) KVCT 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 Tue Sep 10 17:47:53 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:47:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yehei Shemeih Rabba Message-ID: <20190911004753.GA24226@aishdas.org> The AhS (OC 56:1,3) records a tradition that "shemeih" in Qaddish is an allusion to "Shem Y-H". As in "ki Yad al Keis Kah..." (And, regardless of allusion, since I don't think he's really saying it's two words, RYME also says the hei in NOT mapiq. Weird. A question for Mesorah, I guess.) So that when we say "Yisgadeil veyisqadeish shemeih rabba" or "yehei shemeih rabba mevorakh" we are asking for the completion of sheim Y-H to the full sheim havayah through the end of milchamah H' baAmaleiq. (Second diqduq tangent, the Rama says what I wrote above, the comma is after "rabba", not before. Modifies "shemeih" not "mevorakh.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and after it is all over, he still does not Author: Widen Your Tent know himself. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Sun Sep 15 10:44:51 2019 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:44:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm sure this is a very basic question . . . Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Sep 15 22:26:11 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:26:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] p'sukim in R"H davenning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why do the 10 p'sukim in each of the three parts of Musaf R"H davening (malchus, zichronos, shofros) break down in the following order: 3 from Torah, 3 from K'suvim, 3 from Nivi'im, 1 from Torah? Specifically my question is: in all three parts, why is K'suvim before Nevi'im? ===================================== See here for r?ybs approach https://www.etzion.org.il/en/musaf-prayer-rosh-hashana kvct 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 akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com Sun Sep 15 17:49:14 2019 From: akivagmiller at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:49:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat Message-ID: R' Joel Rich asked: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice -- as in eitz hadaat tov v'ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? Your last line seems to be a rhetorical question, asserting that it is indeed possible to have intellect without choice or choice without intellect, and then asking how that could be possible. I suggest that perhaps you have already figured it out: No, it is not possible. These people who lack daas therefore also lack bechira. (Or perhaps they don't totally lack daas and bechira, but the amount they have is less than the minimum shiur.) Once it has been established that someone lacks bechira for whatever reason, it's obvious that they are exempt from any responsibility for mitzvos. Akiva Miller From mcohen at touchlogic.com Mon Sep 16 07:08:18 2019 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] definition of abezraihu Message-ID: <055501d56c98$319ab930$94d02b90$@touchlogic.com> Does anyone have a good definition for me of what makes something abezraihu (of AZ, or murder, or G arayos) As opposed to an isur which somewhat connected, but not yaraig v'al yaavor is mixed dancing abezraihu? assisting an abortion abezraihu? Entering a church sanctuary? Etc Thanks, Mordechai cohen mcohen at touchlogic.com From zev at sero.name Mon Sep 16 08:31:16 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:31:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/19 4:09 am, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn?t have it, it > seems like intellectual acuity. Some commentaries link daat to bechira > (choice ? as in eitz hadaat tov v?ra). Is it possible to have intellect > without choice or choice without intellect? > Daat is perception. Chochma is the initial flash of inspiration, that is represented in cartoons by a light bulb. You know that you have it, but you don't yet know what it is. It's a point. Binah is the expansion of that flash into an actual idea that can be understood. Daat is the application of the idea to choices; perceiving how it relates to the outside world, how it ought to affect ones feelings and therefore ones actions. The decisions of Daat then flow down through the Metzar Hagaron to be expressed in the six middot, and their output is communicated to the outside world by Malchut. Men are stronger in Chochma and Daat, women are stronger in Binah. They can take an idea and see all its implications, but tend to be weak at applying it to control their decision-making process. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Sep 16 10:53:41 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] daat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190916175341.GB848@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:09:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > What is daat? When we say a cheresh, shoteh or katan doesn't have it, > it seems like intellectual acuity... If that were so, it wouldn't include a cheireish. A cheiresh's problem is educability. Getting the facts, rather than the ability to use them. Which is why today's deaf mute is not considered having the din of a cheireish. So it would seem that a lack of daas could mean a free-will issue, like a shoteh who has compulsions, or is ordered about by internal voices. But it doesn't have to be. It could be someone whose bechirah is intact but simply can't make an informed decision. A qatan could theoretically be both -- lacking the emotional maturity to overcome desire in as many cases as a gadol could. But ALSO lacking the knowledge and experience to make informed choices, even if they could. Similarly, you mention the eitz hadaas tov vara. Adam had the power of bechirah, he "simply" had no internal pull toward tov or ra. He therefore naturally sought tov, because that's the cold logical choice, and ra had to be presented by a nachash, an external yeitzer hara. See the Moreh 1:2, who emphasizes that before the cheit, Adam's choices were between emes vasheqer. And Nefesh haChaim (1:6, fn) which says that what the cheit did was internalize the yeitzer hara. This combination of the two into a single picture is REED's (vol II, pg 138) So, the eitz hadaas didn't so much cause bechirah but give it something new to work on. -- I am not sure if this definition of daas is the same as Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense. Also, Daas in the 10 Sephiros sense probably has multiple meanings, depending on how the particular school of Qabbalah relates to Keser and how the source of Chokhmah and Binah (Keser) is sometimes interchanged with their synthesis, their product (Daas). And then there is Daas as in De'iah Binah uHaskeil. So I am not sure these explorations will help produce the halachic meaning. But I will share my thoughts anyway. If Da'as is both the product of insight and reason and their cause, it would seem to have to do something with learning how to think. Which would mean that someone who lacks knowledge or someoen who lacks clear reason couldn't reach daas. It also would explain daatan qalos vs binah yeseirah -- if you do not get as engrained with a particular way to think, you'll be a more creative and wide-ranging thinker. But it will be harder to pick up the skills for pesaq, since that's about locking in to a particular style of reasoning. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they are guidelines. Author: Widen Your Tent - Robert H. Schuller - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at sibson.com Tue Sep 17 22:49:22 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:49:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] halachic living will? Message-ID: Is there an Israeli (law) equivalent to the Agudah/RCA halachic living will? Kvct 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 Tue Sep 17 22:51:40 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:51:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief Message-ID: From someone's post elsewhere: A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to the Torah' is our creed. My reply: Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual (vs. communal obligation) Kvct 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 brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon Sep 16 19:10:33 2019 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:10:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Areivim mailing list Areivim at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 18 06:30:57 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I came across this shiur from HaRav Asher Weiss: Halachik Challenges Facing the IDF, The Mossad and The Israeli Police Force https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/921767/rabbi-asher-weiss/halachik-challenges-facing-the-idf-the-mossad-and-the-israeli-police-force/ I was astounded by the combination of R' Weiss' breadth, depth, and mastery of a number of non-halachic topics. Definitely worth a listen. ================================================================ https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/03/audio-roundup-201712/ Rabbi Asher Weiss -Halachic Challenges Facing the IDF and Mossad Long Term and Indirect Pikuach Nefesh We haven?t had state institutions for 2,000 years so halacha has a steep catch up. R?Weiss outlines his approach and some interesting applications. Money quote??In the Modern World, sometimes halacha is intertwined with norms and ethical values.? KVCT 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 Wed Sep 18 13:17:08 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Message-ID: Do we know what the Rambam?s organizational principal was in the order that he presented the mitzvot? Kvct Joel richTHIS 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 marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 06:21:29 2019 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:21:29 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh Message-ID: The Gemara in the last amud of krisus has a story with King Yanai and the Cohen Gadol where Yanai cuts off his hands. Rav Yosef says brich rachmana that his hands were cut off because he is getting punished in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. In other places the Gemara says that reshaim are rewarded in olam hazeh instead of olam haba. How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in olam haba? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Sep 19 15:24:05 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:24:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97b5baed-951c-5369-fb74-fed0adb0a53b@sero.name> On 19/9/19 9:21 am, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does > the punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in > olam haba is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your > reward in olam haba? Once you've been punished you've been punished. You don't get punished twice for the same offense. E.g. Malkos cancels Kares, even in the times of the BHMK, when people used to literally die young from Kares. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Sep 19 14:07:03 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:07:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190919210703.GA21898@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 08:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? The structure of Mishneh Torah is explained in the Moreh 3:35-64. The Seifer haMitzvos is in similar, but not the same, order as the mitzvos listed in the qoteros to each section of the Yad, and then split into asei vs lav. Why not the same is beyond me. Maybe the work of actually compiling the Yad force shifts in sequence that weren't worked back into Seifer haMitzvos. Maybe not. Or maybe that's just too balebatishe of an answer for some people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Time flies... http://www.aishdas.org/asp ... but you're the pilot. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Zelig Pliskin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sat Sep 21 13:52:18 2019 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:52:18 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral > weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. > Or ch"v, each aveirah. > > If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, > then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead of Olam Haba? From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 17:27:49 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:27:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20190922002749.GB2827@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:52:18PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote: > How does this explain Reshaim getting their reward in Olam Hazeh instead > of Olam Haba? Well, what's the point of punishing someone in olam hazeh if it won't spur teshuvah and get them a better place in the long run? Therefore, instead of the olam haba they're not going to enjoy anyway, Hashem's Chesed rather than His Din is expressed in olam hazeh. Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Thus excellence is not an event, Author: Widen Your Tent but a habit. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aristotle From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:45:22 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:45:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] tenet of belief In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920194522.GD20038@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:51:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From someone's post elsewhere: >> A tenet of our belief is that the Torah is unchanging; the oft-repeated >> adage, 'we do not adapt the Torah to the times, we adapt the times to >> the Torah' is our creed. > Perhaps your next piece might be on how this tenet is being reflected in > an age of rampant materialism and focus on the rights of the individual > (vs. communal obligation) Not sure where rampant materialism comes in. But we've seen a lot of attempts at adaptation to the current emphasis placed on personal autonomy, rights, self-expression, rather than communal or covenental obligation. As for the "someone's post elsewhere": Not 100%. The Torah's principles have to address the facts on the ground. Whether we call the change in how we treat deaf mutes in halakhah an adaptation of the Torah to the times or not, something did change as the times did. I saw a feminist argument for halachic change by claiming that perhaps "nashim" is also not about an innate feature of women, but something that was sociologically true about them in the past, but is no long. Thereby attempting to avoid the kind of "adapting the Torah to the times" most of us would find objectionable by creating a parallel argument to that of cheiresh. Somehow, it seems obvious to me it fails. What I can't say is "why". Maybe it's just my suspicion that his motive had more to do with adapting values to those of the times, and this is just a means to jump through the hoop? And who am I to guess someone else's motives? So, whlie the cheireish case seems a clearcut avoidance of the problem, if you think about it more, it's not so clear where the line is. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 20 12:51:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:51:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Getting punished or rewarded in olam hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190920195142.GA28929@aishdas.org> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > How does that work? If punishment in olam haba is much worse how does the > punishment in olam hazeh take care of it? Likewise, if reward in olam haba > is so much greater how can reward in olam hazeh wipe out your reward in > olam haba? I think things go awry when we think of mitzvos and sekhar in terms of collecting brownie points. These things aren't fungible. Back to the basics. We know from RH leining that Hashem saved Yishmael because He judged him "baasher hu sham". We lein that on RH so that we remember this point during yemei hadin. So, we're not talking about counting mitzvos, or collecting their totral weight. We're talking about the roshem each mitzvah made on the person. Or ch"v, each aveirah. If a punishment in olam hazah makes the person regret their actions, then baasher hu sham changed. If they follow through, it changed more. It might be that in the olam ha'emes, it takes much more to effect change. Especially since the onesh can't followed up by teshuvah, in the same sense of the word "teshuvah". :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair: http://www.aishdas.org/asp it gives you something to do for a while, Author: Widen Your Tent but in the end it gets you nowhere. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 21:43:54 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tartei d'Satrei In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922044353.GA28834@aishdas.org> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:06:29PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB wonders, in my terminology, if the Sanhedrin gives only pure psak, > and I respond by saying that in some circumstances they can't -- the > decision of RYL requires a mixed psak, and the Sanhedrin can't just > refuse to pasken. How, according to RMB, would they avoid this problem? Actually, I was operating in an entirely different paradigm, so there is no rephrasing into your terminology. But I like your model, except for a quibble with using the term "ta'am", so I'll run with it rather than continue that old train of thought. On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:09:44PM +0300, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: >> Of course the Sanhedrin ruled by majority, so following the Sanhedrin's >> psak entails the same problem. > Isn't that oversimplifying the process? If the Sanhedrin did not have > a Mesora on the issue, then they would have a debate until they all > (or at least a majority) agreed. > > As Meforshim on the Mishna (Sanhedrin 11:2) explain: > Yodunu Bo kFi HaSevoros veHekeshos haTorios You see, that's the terminology quibble. I think your RDR's "ta'am" is more commonly called "sevara", even if it is a derashah. "Ta'am" has come to mean a lesson we can take from the mitzvah, or perhaps even some aspect of Hashem's Intent in commanding it. I found RDR's use confusing. But in any case, what I was thinking was closest to RDS's point: > I would assume the debate took into account the Tartei d'Satrei > aspects. We're talking about The 71 Gedolim of the generation, after all. That would mean that the Sanhedrin would try for consistency in sevara, as per the way the mishnah is generally understood. And so you would not get two pesaqim in case law that contradict in implication on the ta'am / sevara level without the second ruling being an overturning of the first. However, we know that the NbY didn't believe this was true of batei din in his day. It's not just "the 71 gedolim of their generation", it was also the stature of chazal, not matched by acharonim. So on a practical level, RDR's question would still hold. We could end up enshrining two pesaqim from acharonim as precedent and halakhah lemaasah that are based on conflicting sevaros. I simply don't think you should be knowingly following both. Unkowingly, though... Yeah, I see the issue. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but it's smarter to be nice. Author: Widen Your Tent - R' Lazer Brody - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:11:00 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:11:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] community minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051100.GB28834@aishdas.org> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:58:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Community plays a large role in halacha (ex. community minhagim, > rabbinic leadership acceptance of Shabbat, responsibility to > educate...) Historically these started out geographically defined but seem > to have morphed to include family, prior culture, geography etc. Given > the proliferation of virtual communities will virtual community membership > also be a factor in halachic determinations? I think minhag is by definition regional, because the idea is that one isn't exposed to conflicting practices. See Pesachim 51a -- when you permanently move, you are supposed to adopt the local minhag. So ther would be no role for family and prior culture minhagim. If it weren't for the fact that we've been moving around a lot since WWI, to the point that the new locale almost always does not have a regional minhag to switch to.A They are only now emerging. Things like Yekkes who no longer only wait 3 hours, or Litvaks making upsherins. The rise of kesarim on the shins on the bayis of a shel rosh. And somehow every year it seems that there are fewer and fewer of us wearing tefillin on ch"m. Etc... (Athough be"H the process of a Minhag America coalescing should be halted bimheira beyameinu, amein!") I think something similar happened when different communities converged on Ashkenaz, and a single Minhag Ashkenaz evolved out of a mix of Provencial, Italian and other existng minhagim However, the notion of shelo yaasu agudos agudos does have new meaning in the current culture. For example, telecommunications means that you know about other locales' minhagim by video, and it's not just some exotica we know about only by rumor. Does it mean that "maqom" in "minhag hamaqom" should be considered globally? I don't think the RBSO wants only one way of practicing. If He did -- why would He have divided us into shevatim, giving each sheivet its own locale and its own batei dinim? A second effect... In Israel, they found that shul having the nusach of "whatever the baal tefillah is most at home with" causes less fighting than sayin "this bet keneset is Nusach X". We don't form agudos agudos over having to be around people who do things very differently (except for the few holdout True Misnagdim, I guess) as much as we do over being in the minority forced to conform. What does that do to minhag? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes http://www.aishdas.org/asp "I am thought about, therefore I am - Author: Widen Your Tent my existence depends upon the thought of a - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:22:42 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:22:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Science Of Astrology In-Reply-To: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15679117920.65eA7B2A9.84749@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20190922052242.GD28834@aishdas.org> On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 10:03:12PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > > Astrology was taken as science for centuries beyond their day. The > > IE, a rationalist, was an astrologer because in his world there was > > no contradiction between the two. > > The idea that nearly all of our Sages believed in something for which > there is zero empirical support, bothers me greatly... Why do you assume Chazal invented science? Believing te world works some way because it's consistent with "common sense" and is philosophically coherent is normal Natural Philosophy, and thus all I would expect from anyone who lived before the invention of the Scientific Method. I put "common sense" in scare quotes because something what we think it obviously true is simply accepted truth in our locale. It is hard to wipe the mind clean enough to really consider things things with a true clean slate. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes http://www.aishdas.org/asp exactly the right measure of himself, and Author: Widen Your Tent holds a just balance between what he can - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham From micha at aishdas.org Sat Sep 21 22:15:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190922051519.GC28834@aishdas.org> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:12:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: >> Rus Rabba (parasha 2:9[4], 7:7[1], 7:10[5]) attributed to Ploni Almoni >> in Meg' Rus a lack of belief in the brand-new derashah. And besides, what >> will happen to my descendents if a later Sanhedrin pasqens differently? >> I think the medrash also uses the idea to explain that Rus did indeed >> convert twice -- once before the derashah, and once after. ... > But exactly what halacha(s) would that drasha have related to? > My understanding is that "Moavi velo Moavis" concerns the halachos of who a > Moabite Jew is allowed to marry; is this person restricted like a mamzer or > not? Me too, but: If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted in anything like a kosher geirus before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned to the idea that they were sinning either way. And further -- although this isn't where I was coming from then -- if a woman converts for marriage, and the marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur http://www.aishdas.org/asp with the proper intent than to fast on Yom Author: Widen Your Tent Kippur with that intent. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Yisrael Salanter From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 23:09:16 2019 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 02:09:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av Message-ID: . Continuing about Rus and Orpah, R' Micha Berger wrote: > If they are not allowed to marry, then why assume they converted > before marrying Machlon and Khilyon? After all, we're resigned > to the idea that they were sinning either way. Me, I'm not resigned to that idea. I would prefer to presume that the sons of a gadol like Elimelech would not marry women who were assur to them. In other words, Rus and Orpah must have had a valid conversion AND (contrary to this idea of changing the halacha via a brand-new drasha) Machlon and Kilyon were privy to Elimelech's insider information that female Moabite converts were muttar for marriage. ("Boaz permitted nothing new; he merely popularized a law that had been forgotten by the majority of the population." - ArtScroll pg 47) > And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the > marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was > valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas > ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for. > But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur??? These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says, "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim? By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have involved some pretty serious leniencies. Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at all.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Sep 22 13:01:17 2019 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:01:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 15 Av In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4871a5c6-e679-b2f9-a661-3a69c31176b0@sero.name> On 22/9/19 2:09 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is > pretty problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion > for the sake of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more > surprising. (Someone *might* make a case that two brothers could be a > Beis Din for gerus, but when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have > any Jewish men around at all.) I don't understand the problem. They arrived in Beis Lechem, where there was surely no shortage of botei din. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 5780 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Wed Sep 25 01:16:45 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:16:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] guessing at history? Message-ID: I recently heard a shiur where the presenter described the "bad scholarship" of the Torah Tmimah when offering the "misread abbreviation" explanation (e.g. v'hazmanim really means fill in the holiday name). I thought it a bit unkind since ISTM the guessing about the historical circumstances of practices is what poskim do all the time (e.g. why some women have a minhag not doing mlacha on rosh chodesh) Kvct 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 Wed Sep 25 01:17:37 2019 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 08:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] elul thought Message-ID: "To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all." - Oscar Wilde Kvct 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 seinfeld at daasbooks.com Wed Sep 25 06:24:34 2019 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching Message-ID: In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura quotes Be?eir Heitiv in the correct form of several specific words in the Birchat HaMazon (blessing after a bread meal). For example, he says, one should say ?sha?atah zahn? and not ?sheh?atah zahn?. 2 questions: 1. What?s the difference between ?sha?atah zahn? and ?sheh?atah zahn?? 2. Why doesn?t he bring all of the nusach issues mentioned in the Beir Heitiv, such as ?hu heitiv, meitiv, yeitiv lanu?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Sep 25 09:40:56 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:40:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mishna Berura on bentching In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190925164056.GA1502@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 09:24:34AM -0400, Alexander Seinfeld via Avodah wrote: > In Siman 187.1.2, Mishna Berura ... > 1. What's the difference between "sha'atah zahn" and "sheh'atah zahn"? I can talk about this one, if not your second question. It's the same as in Modim. Ashkenaz has "Modim anachnui La sha'Atah" and Sephradim say "she'Atah". And there are other cases of "sha'Atah", eg in Emes veYatziv. In the Torah, you will not find a "she-" prefix. HQBH uses "asher". (Nor the "kishe-" for when / whenever.) In early Navi, you'll find "sha-". Not too often, but one case is in Shofetim 6:17, when Gid'on refers to Hashem as "sha'Atah". (Another is the two occurances of "shaqqamti" in Shiras Devorah, 4:7.) Joshu Blau of the Academy of the Hebrew Language says that this was the Northern contraction of "asher", but the Southerner's "she-" eventually wins out. (Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew, pg. 183) Except that Devorah was in Bet-El, so unless she borrowed northern coinage to make the poem work... Tefillah used to tend toward Mishnaic Hebrew in both Ashk and Seph. With exceptions like the masculine "lakh" in "Modim anachnu Lakh". But when the printing press made publishing a siddur with nequdos possible, some hypercorrections went into Nusach Ashkenaz by experts convinced we're all saying it wrong. These tended to be makilim, as few else in Ashkenaz were studying diqduq. One prominant name is R' Shelomo-Zalman Hanau (Razah). Research seems to indicate his diqduq rules were employed by Lubavitch's Alter Rebbe in making Nusach Ari. But that has been debated here in the past. In any case, somehow, people managed to buy into the idea of changing large chunks of the vowelization of their davening in a comparatively short time. Although, the medieval manuscripts indicate that we were using Mishnaic Hebrew all along. These corrections made the Ashk siddur a lot more biblical. It began the debates between "morid hagasham" vs "morid hageshem", since in Mishnaic Hebrew there is no "hagashem", even if it's the last word of the sentence. And in earlier Ashkenaz, they said "vesein chelqeinu besorasakh, sab'einu mituvakh" -- just as Seph still say. The presence of "sha'Atah" in Shoferim meant that that became the form in Ashkenazi in the past 2-3 centuries. In addition, it is possible that the "sha-" is the usual contraction for when one word is taking both the "she-" and "ha-" prefixes. That Gid'on was calling G-d "The You", and this is what we're imitating in davening. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless http://www.aishdas.org/asp he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness. Author: Widen Your Tent Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From acgerstl at hotmail.com Wed Sep 25 15:32:16 2019 From: acgerstl at hotmail.com (Allen Gerstl) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 22:32:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 20:17:08 +0000 R' "Rich, Joel" wrote: > Do we know what the Rambam's organizational principal was in the order > that he presented the mitzvot? Please see the book, Taryag by the late Abraham Hirsch Rabinowitz. Rav Rabinowitz mentions what I believe is a compelling argument by another author that the Rambam arranged his sefer to correspond with a different intended order for the Mishnah Torah for which the Sefer Hamitzvot forms an outline; but the Rambam decided to change the order. KvCT Eliyahu From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 07:04:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Most Regrettable Feature of Human Nature (according to JRR Tolkien) Message-ID: <20190927140419.GC9637@aishdas.org> This struck me as too seasonably appropriate not to share. JRR Tolkien started writing "The New Shadow", a sequel to Lord of the Rings. 13 pages in, he decided that it was too "sinister and depressing" to continue. But in the letter he wrote to his editor about stopping, he included this sentence, which I think deserves much thought: Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. What do you think, is it "the most regrettable feature of [our] nature"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What we do for ourselves dies with us. http://www.aishdas.org/asp What we do for others and the world, Author: Widen Your Tent remains and is immortal. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Albert Pine From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri Sep 27 12:08:31 2019 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:08:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H Message-ID: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> The Torah portion for the first day deals with the barrenness of Sarah and the Haftorah deals with the barrenness of Chanah. Nevertheless, they finally conceived and gave birth to great people. So it is with Rosh Hashanah. Though we may have been barren with a lack of mitzvos or with an abundance of aveiros, HaShem can also cause a miracle for a rebirth in our lives, providing there is the proper kavana. The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. But why honey? Why not something else sweet. The answer I learned many years ago was because the bee works for the honey. And if you want a sweet year, you have to work for it! A healthy, fulfilling and meaningful 5780 From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:50:19 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tidbits for R"H In-Reply-To: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> References: <99870A4F-3752-4793-A346-BC1744B36872@cox.net> Message-ID: <20190927195019.GE9637@aishdas.org> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: > The question has been asked why we did the apple into honey. > The standard answer is to symbolize a sweet year. > But why honey? Why not something else sweet. R' Meir Shapiro (the Lubliner Rav, not the more recent RMS) has another a nice answer: Honey is unique in being a kosher food has a non-kosher source. It is therefore an elegant symbol of teshuvah. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Sep 27 12:10:59 2019 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 15:10:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shema before Shkiah Message-ID: <20190927191059.GD9637@aishdas.org> It is now typical for a minyan that is davening Maariv before sheqi'ah that at the end someone announces a reminder to repeat Shema. I am not sure the MA would have seen the need. Here's the maqor. The SA (72:2) prohibits taking the meis out for qevurah immediately before the time for QS. The MA (s"q 2) says that while this sounds like it is including both morning and evening Shema, he would be meiqil by Q"Sh shel aevis, evening. The AhS (OC 72:2) says that since zeman qeri'as Shema is the whole night, the minhag is to wait until after the qevurah, and then say Shema. After all, there is basically no risk of not having time to say it after qevurah. And oseiq bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah. But this isn't until after he cites Magein Avraham s"q 2, who says that if it's after pelag haminchah, it is better to say Shema before the burial. So, apparently to the MA, saying Shema before sheqi'ah is less problematic than pushing it off. Not sure that means your gabbai's reminded is overkill, since we aren't noheig like the MA anyway. (For the AhS's definition of "we".) Which brings me to something else I found intriguing. What does "ve'ein haminhag kein" mean in this context? Were people being brought to qevurah just before sunset frequently enough to maintain a stable minhag? Doesn't it sound like the kind of rare question the chevra would ask a rav, rather than do what we always do? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but by rubbing one stone against another, Author: Widen Your Tent sparks of fire emerge. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz